ML22124A253

License CSF-1 Amendment Change Files 16-32

ML22124A253
Person / Time
Site:	West Valley Demonstration Project
Issue date:	08/13/1971
From:	Duckworth J Nuclear Fuel Services
To:	Cunningham R US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
Doell M
Shared Package
ML22124A246	List: ML22124A252 ML22124A253 ML22129A041 ML22129A042
References
Download: ML22124A253 (370)

Text

CHANGE NO. 16 NF S NUCLEA:R.. fUEL SE :R..VICES,I_N_c_._ __

SOX 124"'WEST VALLEY. N.Y. 14171 AREA CODE 716 TELEPHONE 9042-323!5

. r"~

August 13, 1971 Mr. R. E. Cunningham, Acting Director Division of Materials Licensing United States Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Cunningham:

Pursuant to Paragraph 50.59 of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. hereby requests a change in Technical Speci-fications for Operating License CSF-l. The proposed changes will permit the NFS Processing Plant at West Valley, New York to transfer to process and process plutonium nitrate-uranyl nitrate solutions such as now being prepared at the NFS facility at Erwin, Tennessee. The Division of Mater-ial Licensing previously approved receipt and storage of such material by Change No. 14 of the Technical Specifications of License CSF-l. The safety evaluation of the proposed processing plan and the proposed changes to the Technical Specifications are attached.

NFS believes that these changes do not contain any significant safety consideration not described or implicit in the Final Safety Analysis Re-port submitted under Docket 50-201; therefore, authorization of the changes is requested.

Very truly yours, JPD:cp Attachments cc: E. D. North D. H. Shafer B. G. Bechhoefer d

3692

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 3

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 4

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 5

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 6

PROPOSED CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROCESSING CATEGORY 10 rUELS

1. Add the following to Specification 4.4:

"4.4.4 For category 10 fuels, transfers to the dissolvers shall be controlled so that the resultant U-235 equivalent concentration in a dissolver shall not exceed the concentrations shown in Figure 4.4.1."

2. Hodify the terminology of Figure 4.4.1 so that a) the ordinate reads "Maximum Allowable U-235 Equivalent Concentration, grams per liter" and b) the abscissa reads "Weight Percent Fissile Isotopes in Mixture of Fissile and Fertile Isotopes".

3. Modify the terminology of Specification 4.5.1 to "The concentration of fissile isotopes in the feed adjustment and accountability tank shall not exceed, after adjustment, the U-235 equi-valent concentration shown in Figure 4.5.1, based upon either the fuel enrichment prior to irradiation or the fuel enrichment determined by analysis prior to adjustment, except that "

4. Hodify the terminology of Figure 4.5.1 so that a) the ordinate reads "l1aximum Allowable U-235 Equivalent Concentration, grams per liter" and b) the abscissa reads "Weight Percent Fissile Isotopes in ~1ixture of Fissile and Fertile Isotopes".

5. Remove the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Bases of Specifi-cation 4.5.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 8

_~el

• Services, Inc.

• b) Transient and Accident Conditions The effects of transient conditions in solvent extraction columns on nuclear criticality safety should be analyzed, and special procedures for the prevention of transient conditions should be described. The analysis should also determine the effects of transient process upsets on the safety of related systems such as solvent clean up or waste handling.

An analysis should be made to determine l~hether the effects of a maximum accident when processing plutonium solutions will exceed the effects of maximum accidents considered in the FSAR.

Descriptions of the above analyses should be provided in sufficient detail to enable the staff to assess their validity. A summary of the results obtained should be included in your submission.

3. Licensing of Operators Licenses presently held by operators at ~7S do not permit processing Category 10 material, therefore, NFS should submit a request for amendment of the licenses of those operators who Idll be involved in the campaign. T;.ls request should be supported by information to 1) identify special operator training needed for the plutonium processing campaign, 2) describe the operator training program to be used and

3) confirm that operators will be trained and tested to demonstrate their understanding of all pertinent aspects of the plutonium proc-essing campaign.

The above comments are of :>. general nature. There mc;Y be more specific questions after receipt of the more detailed information.

Our review of your request for authorization to process plutonium nitrate-uranyl nitrate solutions will be resumed after we receive the information requested above.

Sincerely, Ch~ twood, Chief Irradiated Fuels Branch Division of Haterials Licensing cc: B. G. Bechhoefer J. Cline, ASDA S. K. Breslauer, ASDA RECEiVED R. N. Miller, NFS E. D. North, NFS AUCi301971 J. P. DUf'I(l.1Ic"rj"

\".' \~t 'j\ n

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 10

N F S BOX 124"'WEST VALLEY. N.Y. 14171 AREA eOOE 716 TELE .... ONE 9~2-323!5 October 15, 1971 R. B. Olitwood, Chief Irradiated Fuels Branch Division of Materials Licensing United States Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C. 20545

Dear Mr. Chitwood:

The attached information modifies and expands our submission of August 13, 1971, which requested authorization for 1) the transfer to 1nprocess storage and 2) the processing by solvent extraction of plutonium nitrate-uranyl nitrate solutions. A request for modification of the operator licenses has been for-warded under separate cover.

Your earliest possible review is requested. Members of the West Valley Staff will be available whenever desired, for conferences with the personnel of the Irradiated Fuels Branch.

Very truly yours,

~~ . J. P. Duckworth Plant Manager JPD:ps Attachments cc: E. D. North (Rockville)

D. H. Shafer (ASDA)

B. G. Bechhoefer

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 12

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 13

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 14

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 15

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 16

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 17

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 18

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 19

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 20

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 21

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 22

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 23

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 24

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 25

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 26

PROPOSED CHANGE 111819 shielded by 5'-9" of concrete. Gaseous activity might well be di.scharged from the stack in excess of Paragraph 4.1. This possibility has been analyzed in paragraphs 7.30-7.32 and 8.24-8.28 of the Safety Analysis and it has been shown that even in the event SUdl a critical incident were to occur, there would not be injury to either plant personnel or the general public.

If this specification is found to be exceeded, no further fission-able material will be added to the rel.ork system until the situation is corrected; and the remedial action must be taken immediately.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 28

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 29

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 30

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 31

• 111825 Hr. J. P. Duckworth 3 OCT:> 8 1971 He will continue our revie~, of your request for authorization to process plutonium nitrate-uranyl nitrate solutions l'lhen the above information

ls received.

Sincerely, R. n. Chitl,ood, Chief Irradiated Fuels Branch

• Division of Haterials Licensing RECEIVED NOV 3 1971 J. P. DUCKWOHTH

So-~o I N F S NUCLEA~ fUEL SE~vICEs,I_N_c_*.___

sex r24***WEST VALLEY. N.Y. 14171 AREA COCE 7re TELe::F=:q*... ON~ g"'2-323!5 October 29, 1971 R. B. Chitwood, Chief Irradiated Fuels Branch Division of Materials Licensing United States Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Chitwood:

During discussions between members of the Irradiated Fuels Branch and J. R. Clark, Technical Services Manager of West Valley Processing Plant, several specific questions were presented concerning our application to process Category 10 fuels. We are hereby presenting information in response to these questions and to supplement ou~ sub-missions of August 13 and October 15, 1971.

Very tru11 yours, I

!-),/)[;I.---eL;

,/l 'I . '~

1-_ __

/  :. P. Duckworth Plant Manaaer i JPD:ps i

/

Attch.

I cc: E. D. North D. H. Shafer B. G. Bechhoefer

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 34

Page withheld as unreviewed potentially containing Export Controlled Information 35

Page withheld as unreviewed potentially containing Export Controlled Information 36

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 37

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 38

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 39

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 40

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 41

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 42

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 43

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 44

N F S November 12, 1971 R. B. Chitwood, Chief Irradiated-Fuels Branch Division of ,-!aterials Licensing United States Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C. 20545

Dear Mr. Chitwood:

The attached Jroposed Technical Specifications ,for Category 10 fuel are submitted in response to discussions between members of the Irradiated Fuels Branch and Mr. J.R. Clark, Technical Services Manager of the West Valley Processing Plant. These specifications utilize the recommendations and the plutonium data of O&~L-TM-686.

Your earliest possible review is requested. Members of the West Valley Staff will be available whenever desired, for conferences with the personnel of the Irradiated Fuel Bran~~.

Very trul~ yours,

/,

j /' I

/.1.,

_I* .

I-I .*

""~'L-I /

J

~r.~(,*

"orr--

/. -

I J. P. Duckworth

. Plant Manager JPD:ps Attch.

cc: E. D. North (Rockville)

D. H.' Shafer (ASDA)

B. G. Bechhoefer

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 46

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 47

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 48

PROPOSED CHANGE November 12, 1971 4.11 If this specification is found to be exceeded, no further fissionable materials will be added to the rework system until the situation is corrected; and the remedial action must be taken immediately.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 50

Ene.

• I~ <.OC..

C, ~ /"<. J r - ,L. .. ( F. (<..-

11168B 6000 Executive Boulevnrd, Suite 600, Rockville, Maryland * ~os (301) 1,24*1i December 1,1971 Mr. Seymour H. Smiley, Director Di~isioll of Materials Licensing United States Atomic Energy Commission Hashi ngton, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Smiley:

In response to your request during the meeting on November 24, 1971, attached are three reports covering the subjects of: 1) an investigation of SOllrces of activity into tile Low Level Liquid Waste System; 2) the managelilent of lO~'1 level liquid effluent during the SEFOR campaign at NFS.,

Hest Valley Plant: and 3) a summJtion and stiltus report of the oreration of the LO:'1 Level \'Jaste Treatment FaCility, illong I'lith future plilns.

It is hoped that this rr.ateriil1 anSl'lers the concerns expressed in these areilS, so that approval of the license amendment for the processing of SErOR scrap material may be issued. Because of existing contractual commitments, your prompt review of this material \~ould be appreciated.

Very truly yours, fA,t-d~

W. H. Lewis Vice President WHL:kac Enclosures i

I I

111689 INVeSTIGATION OF SOURCES OF STP.o;';TIU:r ACTIVITY TO THE INTERCEPTORS The technology available at the time of the design of the l,est Valley Reprocessing Plant indicated that Sr~~ isotope would not be a significant contributor in the activity discharged via the 101. level liquid effluent system. Historically, the Sr 90 activity has increased in the effluents, but a continuing effort on the part of i*iFS has kept the amount discharged to the environment to well below tile allowable level. Periodically, spot evaluations of most probabl.e sources for the strontium were conducted but these failed to verify thee principal sources. In :-:ovember of 1970, as part of its continuing effort to reduce the amount of radioactivity released to the environment, tlFS initiated an extensive investigation to determine the sources of Sr 90 to the low level liquid waste interceptors.

Drain Sampling Program All drains and streal;1S connected I"ith the 101'1 level waste "ater system were identified, e'/alu;1ted and sampled according to the sysLematic program outlined below:

Phase I Shutdo.m of all drains to the interceptors. S;lmple and analyze any flows noted.

Phase II General S3fnpling of plant drains while plant is 'dOlvn', i.e.

not processing.

Phase III - General sampling of plant drains while plant is processing.

Phase IV Installation of sample taps, if necessary, on exposed drain he"ders within the plant.

Analytical results of the s3."l1ples taken arc tabulated on the attached Sample Analysis Log. A general drainage diagram of the plant and a Table identifying plant area designations have also been included in tllis report.

The program was begun on 11/10/70 and t!le first 3 phases of the investigation took place over a period of nearly 3 months. On 1/25/71, the drain sampling program I,as concluded with a second shutdo*..;n of flows to the interceptors.

Phase IV, the installation of sample taps on drainage headers, was not necessary because the sal::pling probram was successful in locating the Sr 90 sources in the plant ,..hich contributed to interceptor activity.

Some difficulties were experienced during this program due to the nature of the interceptor drainage system. The wide variations in flow rates of contributing stre~"l1S as well as fluctuations in the radioisotope concentration made an absolute material balance difficult. P~dioactivity of the streams has been estilil,.ted frolil the analytical results of specific samples which are considered to be representative. Variations in the analyticnl results from different laboratories were noted, but later resolved in the course of the investigation.

111()~O KEY: F.D. = Floor Drains

~1'.0.(1} ~

r:in} P.D.

D.F.

= Process Drains

= Drinking Fountains

( ) = Number of Drains

.. j 1

I / = Sr90 Source L ____ (Oui~.

of P** c.~, e.,'.\d,~~)

I N

I H'S 1.l.(1)

I

~.'-11 t---..L.--------::==-------~

r---t r

I I

~~ ~ I ~ -tE':j ~iE"J I I~

1 / /, ,~ I~d=,  ;

r---'

> ~*I.fJ, NUCLEAR FUEL S~RVICES, INc..

"R fU"l :x !l=:t:2 ::z:::::a

~

r.o..h} \'\[5":'" \* ... LLCy. NLT._ _ _ _ _ __

".0_(1)

Pt AllT Chf. 1;t*G f *T_ _ __

• Plani Area Designation

, 1116.!J1.., ...

ANA Analytical Aisle ANC Analytical Cells ARG Acid Recovery Cell ARPR Acid Recovery Pump Room CCR CPC Crane Room cm Chemical Operating Aisle CPC Chemical Process Cell CR Control Room CUP Cask Unloading Pool CVA Chemical Viewing Aisle EDR Equipment Decontamination Room "

FRS Fuel Receiving and Storage GPA GPC-MC Operating Aisle

'GPC General Purpose Cell GCR GPC Crane l1oo!l1 HAC Hot Acid Cell .' .

HIT Interceptor lAB Laboratories LYlC. Liquid Waste Cell LWA Lower Ylarm Aisle LXA Lower Extraction Aisle MC Miniature Cell MCR PI.IC Cra ne Room MOA Mechanical Operating Aisle MS Maintenance Shop OFF Office Building OGA OGC-ARC Operating Aisle OG3R Off-Gas Blower Room OGC Off-Gas Cell PCR Process Chemical Room PEA Puise Equipment Aisle PMC Process Mechanical Cell PMRA Power ManipUlator Repair Area PPC Product Purification Cell PPS Product Packaging and Shipping RER Ram Equi~~ent Room SL Storage Lagoon SR Scrap Removal Room SSC Sample Storage Cell SST Solvent Storage Tanks UPC Uranium Product Cell UR Utility Room UWA Upper Warm Aisle UXA Upper Extraction Aisle VEe Ventilation Exhaust Cell VSR Ventilation Supply Room Vl'IR Ventilation \'lash Room WBA Waste Burial Area' WHSE Warehouse

\'ITF Waste Tank Farm XCI Extraction Cell #1 XC2 Extraction Cdl #2 XC3 Extraction Cell #3 XCR Extraction Che:mical Room r .. .L~ _ _ ~l __ t'"' _ _ _ _ , _ ",.,-

• 111692 Dr;lir! S!lutdo~n Flows After Phase I of the strontium investigation was carried out, the investi-gation proceeded under the assumption that there was an 'unknown' stream com- ,~

ing from somet-'here \,;i thin the plant \,,'hich contained the bulk of the Sr 9U

• This" was based on the fact that during the first drain shutdown of 11/13/70, a continued flo\J of approximateJ.y 8 gpr.l was noted. A sample of this stream showed a Sr 90 activity of 1 x 1O- 3 )lCi/m1. The major portion of the continued flow to the interceptors was eventually traced to a leak in a cooling water header in the Uh',\. In addition, approximately 1 gpm was attributed to condensate traps and pLL':1p packing leakage. The radioacLivity in the sample came from contaminated drainage lines, caused by a previous spillage of high activity liquid. A follow-up investigation illto tlle.plant activities around tllis time showed that six hours preceding the drain sllutdown, a ventilation washer equipment failure occurred which resulted in the release of irigh activity liquid to the inter-ceptors. Due to t!lis spill, the interceptor influent peaked at 0200, 11/13/70.

As the contaminated drain lines washed out, the interceptor influent activity gradually dropped over the next few hours, but was still 8.4 x lO-3~Ci/ml gross S, 15 minutes before the drain shutdown. The s,lmple which was taken of the

'unknown' stream during the shutdown Ind a gross P, activity of 8.6 x 10- 3

• A second pl:rnt drain shutdown, conducted on 1/25/71, verified that no uncxplainable or uncllccked activity source existed within tile plant. During this second shutdo~m a continued flow of about 6 gpm was noted. A sample of this stream showeu an activity of 1.49 x 10- 3 CUml gross About 2 gpm was due to the :;lr,'ar gland water l..;hich I.'as left running. An inspection of the otilit)' room showed about J gpm running into the various drnins and anotllcr 1 gpm was attributed to other condensate traps and gland water leaks throur,:lout the plant. 'l1lC activity in this sample was due to the shear gland water and te.lshing out of the co::unon drain line which the utility room and 7D-6 share. TIle pi! of this flow sample teas about 2.0. TIlere was no evidence of any further source of waste w~~er activity during this shutdown.

SI 90 Sources After a thorough investigation of the ~FS drainage system, analysis of the samples taken trom various parts of the plant (during processing and while down) shows that the Sr 30 present in the low level waste water comes essentially from six sources within the plant; three continuous sources and three intermittent sources.

Continuous sources:

1. 7D-6 Acid Recovery System Overheads

2. Shear gland water

3. 7D-lJ General Purpose E~aporator Overheads Intermittent sources:

1. Ventilation l,1asher :<.oom (V1JR)

2. Acid recovery system leakagc J. Cask decontamination pit (cask coolant)

Table I shows a balance on Sr 90 to the interceptors based on typical samples and flo",s. Flow rates and concentrations will, of course, vary widely depending

on plant conditions. The table sho,,"s 7D-6 to be the predominant Sr 90 111693 source on a continuous basis, although at a given period of time, an intermittent source may dominate the strontium contributions to the inter-ceptors. All three intermittent sources mentioned above have been known to release spikes of activity to the interceptors in the past. TIle acid recovery sys tern in particular, has a large quantity of Sr 90 associated vri th it as can be seen from the 7D-3 (acid recovery feed), 7D-S (recovered acid for dissolution) and 7D-6 sample results.

Corrective Action Two Sr 90 sources, one continuous and one intermittent have already been eliminated from the interceptor flov;. TI,e shear gland water and the VHR drains have been permanently rerouted i:lto the P}!C to be taken into the hot waste system. TIlO acid recovery systt.'m, which includt.'s 7D-6. has been identi-fied as the major source, contributi.ng 80 (:0 85% of the Sr 90 to the low level waste system. A ne\, waste evaooration '-"ld acid recovery system has been under design and construction since 1968 and uill be operational in 1972. Hhen comple ted, these modifications to the \,est Valley plant will eliminate up to 95% of these Sr 90 releases.

1116~4 TABLE I Sr 90 Released to Interceptors Typical Flow Rate Typical Sr 90 Activity Sr 90 Release (Gallons/day) (uCi/nl) (\lCi/dav) Percent of Total 7D-6 12,000 .4

• 0 X 10- 4 18,200 80 Outer Shear Gland 2,800 2.5 x 10- 4 2,650 12 7D-13 Inner Shear Gland Intermittent Source (Example 2,500 120 11 7.2 x 10- 5 4.0 x 10- 4 2.4 x 10- 2 680 180 990 3

.8 4.2 postulated represents the small amount of 7D-5 leak or spill necessary to balance I Sr 90 concentration at inter- i ceptors)

Cold streams-Interceptors 42,569 streams of negligible Sr 90 concentration. (Steam con-densate, cooling water, plant water, etc.)

Interceptor Total 60,000 1.0 x 10- 4 22,700 100%

~~ STRO~TIUtl I~VESTIGATIOX A~ALYSIS LOG 111695' Activit~ (uCi/rnl)

Sample Date* Comments Laboratory Gress S Sr 9C Cs 137 Other Interceptor 11/13 All known streams NFS-H&S 8.63 x 10- 3 H3..1.25 x 10- 3 off. Plant down. NFS-A.'iA 1.73 x 10- 3 CePr I44-6.l7 x 10-3 Flow "8 gprn RuRhl06_2.1S x 10-3 ZrNb 95-9.44 x 10- 4 Cs I34_1.S8 x 10- 4 Interceptor (Daily 12/15 Plant operation nornal. Fuel Isotopes,Inc.

Eberline NFS-H&S NFS-A.'iA 1.13 x 10- 2 6.00 x 10- 3 1.98 x 10- 3 3.05 x 10- 3 1.18 x 10- 3 2.20 x 10- 3 2.24 x 10- 3

1. 90 x 10- 4 H 3-2.14 x 10- 2 (Activity too low for Composite) being processed. spectrum)

Flow " 50 gpm Isotopes,Inc. 3.14 x 10- 3 2.97 x 10- 4 5.37 x 10- 4 Interceptor 1/25/71 Interceptor Influent shut down NFS-H&S 1. 49 x 10- 3 Flow 6 gpr:!

VWR 11/10 Plant down. NFS-Il&S 3.91 Sample taken NFS-A.'iA 4.96 6.42 x 10-1 RuRh 106 -7.48 during V\,R de- Cs 134 _ 1.63 x 10- 1 conta:nination. CePr 144 5 64 x 10- 1 Isotopes,Inc. 2.86 3.10 x 10- 2 1. 33 VWR 11/13 Plant down. NFS-H&S 25.7 Sample taken NFS-A.'iA 46.5 6.42 x 10-1 RuRh 1OG -54.9 during Vl{R de- Cs 134 _1.53 x 10- 1 contamination. ZrNb 9S - 4.92 x 10- 1 CePr I44 <5.00 x 10- 1 Isotopes, Inc. 6.13 8.07 x 10- 3 2.36 x 10- 1 X-2 Coolant 11/16 Cask carrying NFS-H&S 3.29 x 10- 1 PG&E fuel. NFS-A.'iA 3.05 ZnGS -5.S7 Hn S4 -1.78

':0 60 -1.02 CePr I44 -7.20 x 10-1 Isotopes,Inc

• 1.66 2.50 x 10-2 8.12 x 10-2

• 10"'71"\ ___ , ___

lll~;~o'

-r

,j

_ _ _ _ _ _ _~~_A_""cti"'ity (IlCi/!:tl)

Sa::ple Date Comments Laboratory Gross S Sr'" cs* 3i ~

8/25 Plant operation Isotopes,Inc. 8.0 x 10- 1 5.1 x 1O-~

normal.

11/23 Plant down ~rS-H&S 6.53 x 10- 1 2/17/71 Plant down-flushout Isotopes,Inc. 1.54 2.4 x 10- 2 11/20 ~FS-H&S 2.45 x 10- 2 Isotopes,Inc. 1.64 x 10- 2 3.43 X 10- 3 2.90 X 10- 3 9/17 Isotopes,Inc. 2.46 x 10- 2 5.44 X 10- 6 1.4 X 10- 2 11/23 NFS-Ji&S 2.54 x 10- 2 12/3 ~;FS-A:o;A 1. 4 x 10- 2 1.93 X 10- 2 Cs 134_ 3 . 6 X 10- 3 Co 6 0-1.8 X 10- 3 Cland 11/20 Shear inactive NFS-H&S 2.94 x 10- 2 T~~~~_~~ T__

-~~~~r~~'~~&~.

~ no __ ,n-2

~.vv A AU

... ,~

J .... u X

.--~

~u

':.04 X IV

.. .. _11 12/22 Shear active. NFS-H&S 6.5 X 10- 1 (Sample not filtered) 12/29 Shear inactive. NFS-H&S 1.59 X 10- 3 NFS-ANA 5.41 X 10- 3 1.1 X 10- 3 CePrl~~-3.5 x 10- 3 I3 Cs "-4.0 X 10-"

Rur~106-8.0 x 10-~

Isotopes,Inc. 3.68 X 10-~ 4.01 x 1O-~ 3.22 x 10-~

12/22 Shear active. NFS-H&S 1.80 X 10- 2 (Sample not filtered) 12/29 Shear inactive. NFS-H&S 1.51 x 10- 3 NFS-ANA 1. 70 X 10- 3 4.56 x 10-~ CePrl~"-8.83 x 10- 5 Zr~~95-2.13 x 10-"

Rup~106_1.62 x 10-~

Isotopes,Inc. 1.39 x 10- 3 2.53 x 1O-~ 7.69 x 1O-~

<J

' Illfj97 .

Activit~ (uCi/ml)

Sa:nple Date Comr.:ents Laboratory Gross 6 Sr' U CS: 31 Other 7D-6 8/19 Plant operation Isotopes, Inc. 2.74 x 10- 2 4.30 X 10- 7 normal.

12/15 Plant operation NFS-H&S 2.37 x 10- 2 H3 -2.38 X 10- 1 normal l;rS-Al,A 1.10 x 10- 1 3.48 x 1O-~ RuRhIOS-5.37 X 10- 2 ZrlJ>95-4.22 x 10-~

Cs I3 "-3.04 x 10-~

Isotopes,Inc. 4.19 xl0-~ 4.g0 x d.Q;~ 3.71 x lO- s 2/17/71 Plant down-flushout Isotopes,Inc. 4.33 x 10- 4. x 1 7D-13 11/12 8D-6 material NFS-H&S 1. 46 x 10-~

11/25 SD-6 t:lat~rial Isotopes,Inc. 6.94 x 10- 5 3.69 X 1O- s 1. 38 X 10- 5 12/15 8D-6 material NFS-H&S 1.67 x 10- 3 H3 -3.2 X 10- 2 NFS-AliA 2.97 x 10- 3 2.15 X 10- 5 RuRhIOS-2.08 X 10- 3 7~~,l;..gS_? no *.* ,,-5

---._ _.v~ ..... AV CePr l *"-2.68 x 10-~

CS I3 "<1.42 x 10- 5 Isotopes, Inc. 1.61 x 10- 3 7.21 X 10- 5 5.99 x 10- 5

~ ..

9/20 Isotopes,Inc. 4.00 x 10- 3 4.6 X 10- 5 7.4 X 10- 5 11/20 NFS-Il&S 7.90 x 10- 5 Isoto;::<s, Inc. S.30 x 10- 5 1.63 X 10-& 2.S9 x lO- s 12/17 llFS-H&S 3.70 x 10-"

~S :lecon 12/17  ;';FS-H&S 9.14 x 10- 4 Pit FRS R. R. 12/17 NFS-H&S 6.60 x 10- 5 Drain Ra~ Gland 11/20 Plant dmtn. NFS-H&S 4.31 x 10- 5 Isotopes, Inc. 3.21 x 10- 5 5.S6 X lO- s 1. 32 X 10- 5

>;., Illf}!JQ '

1/21/71

,~

Activitl (UCi/ml)

Sa:n?le Date Co:::nents

---

~

Laboratory Gross i3 Sr 90 Cs 13 J *Other L-:*:A Drain 12/15 Plant operation NFS-H&S 4.26 x 10- 5 No "detectable alpha normal. I,FS-i\;,A 3.37 x 1O-~ activity Isotopes,Inc. 3.91 x 10- 5 2.23 X 10- 7 3.97 X 10- 7 l\ater Dis- 11/20 NFS-H&S 9.86 X 10- 5 tiller Isotopes,Inc. 6.19 x 10- 5 2.3 X 10- 5 - 9.85 X 10- 6 A:JA-South A:JA-:':orth Lau:lcry 11/20 11/20 11/20 l;rS-H&S I,FS-H&S NFS-H&S 4.39 x 10- 5 9.77 x 10- 5 1.01 x 10- 5 Isotopes,Inc. 5.34 x 10- 5 1. 88 X 10- 7 9.52 X 10- 7 12/15 I,FS-H&S 6.24 x 10- 6

':SR 11/20 NFS-ll&S 2.95 x 10- 6 Isotopes,Inc. 6.99 x 10- 7 2.35 X 10- 7 2.89 X 10- 7 12/15 NFS-ll&S 2.75 x 10- 5

oo11ng Water 11/18 Plant down.  :,FS-Il&S S.27 x 10- 6

once~sate R. Plant dOlm. 1.99 x 10- 5 11/18 tlFS-Jl&S 12/17 Plant operation NFS-E&S 8.01 x 10- 6 nor::lal.

~'TF Steam 11/19 8D-2 heat ex- NFS-ll&S 3.48 x 10- 6 Condensate changer operating Ra;t ~'ater 11/13 From supply lakes Isotopes,Inc. 5.55 x 10 -8 2.07 x 10- 8 4.75 X 10- 8

• 111699 MANAGEr'lENT OF LOl4 LEVEL LIQUID EFFLUENT DURING THE "SEFOR" CAMPAIGrl AT NFS \~EST VALLEY PLANT The operations and processing of the NFS West Valley Plant during the SEFOR rework period with relation to the low level liquid effluent will not be routine, since no virgin fission product activity will be introduced from the Chemical operation. SEFOR scrap is a mixture of U and Pu oxides from fuel rod production a t the NFS Erwi n Pl ant. By contract, the Pu is to be reseparated for return to the AEC. There are no fission products present in the material. Thus, there is es~ential1y no 9 or ~ radio-activity present in the scrap.

The SEFOR Pu is to be separated without inventory co-mixing. To achieve this, the p1~~t has tc be th0rc~gh1y f1~~hed to ~i~i~ize the DU ~01dt!p. This flushing also transfers the bulk quantities of fission products present in nor-mal inventory to HiCjI1 Level l'last<:! Storage. It is planned to re~Jork the SEFOR scrap on a dilute f10wsheet as sub~littcd to the AEC-DML for approval on 10/15/71.

This f10wsheet, under equilibrium conditions will generate 45 gpm of effluent to the 10~1 level 1iquid I'laste system. It is expected that due to the flushing nature of this operation, the residual activity in the process effluent will decrease with time. Therefore, the SEFOR rework operation is considered as a beneficial operation with regard to purging the plant and reducing the quantity of process activity discharged to the 10\~ level liquid effluent system.

During the period of time required to rework the SEFOR material, there will be other activities in progress which will contribute to the fiss~on product input to the low level liquid effluent system. Examples of these are:

1) Discharge of contaminated liquids collected from solid waste burial operations as reco:nmended by NYS Department of Environmental Conser-vation in a letter dated 12/30/70. These liquids have been retained in holding ponds awaiting completion of a new 1/4 mile transfer line on 11/15/71. Because of the start of the winter precipitation season, this liquid will have to be routed to the low level waste treatment system during the SEFOR campaign. It is estimated that there are 260,000 gallons containing one curie of f activity.

2) Return of encapsulated ruptured NPR fuel to the AEC. As part of the closeout of the AEC-NFS fuel reprocessing contract, several shipments of ruptured NPR fuel are to be made during the SEFOR campaign. These shipments require handling of the encapsulation cans in a special manner and loading and unloading shipping casks. These casks and the handling equipment have to be decontaminated to DOT limits before shipment.

Therefore, decon and cleanup solutions will be generated, which because of the system design, will go to the Low Level Waste Treatment System.

I *

• 111700 The total volume and curies of fission products cannot be estimated at this time, bllt as in the past, the scheduling of operations will be such that regulations and limits are not normally approached.

3) Ti e- i ns of the net-I aci d recovery, gas treatment and other revamp systems. Historically, the principal source of activity to the low level liquid effluent has been from the acid recovery system. To correct this, NFS has assigned priority one to replacing the present system \-lith a ne\'l more efficient systenl. This work was started in 1968 and construction is 90% complete. In order to keep this work progressing, it is necessary to start to tie-in the ne~1 system so the old system can be abar.doned. To do this, it is necessary to decon certain areas of the plant to as 10\'1 a radiation level as possible in order that the exposure to the workers is minimized.

Th ............... +,..""',.... .....I,....,.. ............. ,.. .. .; ** ; .. .; ..... ,.. ...........

.,,"-, '-IV, 1.., ............. Vll ........ "', ... I \;,'-.,) '-'I ...

,..,.t-. .... ,.I ** , ...... ....I

.,)1",.11\..""'-1'",\,.1.

,., ...... .; .......... l.. .....

u .... , 11I':f \011'-'

C:r'C'f"In

.... '-, VI\

............. .: .... .J 1-'1...1 IVU.

In addition to the continuous process effluent and batch decontami-nation volumes from auxiliary operations, there are over 5 million gallons of low level effluent that have accumulated in the surge lagoons during the exceptionally dry summer and fall of this year.

These solutions \'Iill have to be released at a controlled rate governed by the flo\'l in the Cattaraugus Creek. This is how the low level liquid -.. aste effluent system was designed and operated in order to meet the peak as \'Iell as annual concentration limits estab-lished for the Cattaraugus Creek.

The management of the low level liquid waste effluents during the SEFOR rework period ~Iill require, as it has in the past, a control of the various effluent sources to insure that the overall release is in conformance to Federal Regulations and Technical Specifications. During the SEFOR processing the Lo\'l Level Waste Treatment Plant \'Ii 11 be operated to process current generated waste pl us some of the inventory of low level \-Iaste presently stored in the Lagoons 2 and 3. Specifically, we propose to control the release to the environ such that:

1) The concentration of CS-137 in the liquid waste at the pgint of release from the lagoon system should not exceed 2 x 10- yCi/ml.

2) The concentration of radioactivity in the Cattaraugus Creek should not exceed either:

a) Ten percent (10%) of the prorated concentrations listed in Appendix B, Table II, 10 CFR Part 20 averaged over the SEFOR processing period; or b) Twenty percent (201n of the prora ted concentrati ons 1is ted in Appendix S, Table II, 10 CFR 20 for any ~Ieekly composite sample taken during the SEFOR processing period in accordance with Technical Speci fication 5.1.1.

• 111701

3) If the radioactive concentrations exceeds either 1) or 2) above, then NFS shall:

a) Take such action as is necessary to come into prompt compliance.

b) ~lake an investigation to identify the cause or causes for such levels of radioactivity.

c) Define and initiate a program of action to reduce such levels, and d) Report these actions to the Commission on a timely basis.

Using these controls and based on plant experi~gce, we would expect the Sr-gO concentration in the waste to be about 5 x 10 ).!c/ml. Therefore, under average conditions the concentration of Sr-gO in Cattaraugus Creek shou1d  :\.'~r:g~ ~bc~t tl::~ ~c:""cc:~t :f ~.;~c.. S~nc(; thl: Lu'~ Lt:'vE-1 ~:a5tt: T'(:ati""le'r",L Plant operation is controlled such that the maximum Cesium-137 concentration in the ion exchange effluent is about 2 x 1O-5}JCi/ml, the average CS-137 concentration in the lagoon effluents will be much less.

r. 1\- . G]. * \ \~ <?- , v~~

':' .,r< ~

0' I (~i~Cj !

>--="'.

'. ,0 ..., .,"-' ,

. 111.680

~I I [~:,;.=:c:c::r [:r~C' I ScnJiccc, £I1C. GOOD Executive Boulevard, Suite GOD, Rockville, Mnrylond

• 2[

[J G'S) I /,-S~;~id:~HY Of-G0t!;:~~~*omPJny---------------*------ - (301) 424, December 8, 1971 r*;I'. Richal'd C. Chib-lOod, Chief IITildiated Fuels Gl'anch United StJtes Momie [ne\-gy Comnlission

\'/ashington, D. C. 205~5 Deur 1.Jr. Chi tl.*Qod:

In respoilse to youI' .-equest of December 7, 1971, for a further am-plification of futlJrC work to be performed in the area of ilnproving the pe\-formJnec of the lo~': lr!vel 1 iquid \':ilsLe SYSt.CIll, attilche(/ is an acldcl1-dUll! to our D2CCI~\bcr 1, 1971, report descri bi n9 the fUrther efforts pl an-ned at this ti~e.

Very truly yours, J.),J't( ~J;., J.C:

H. II. le'../i s Vice President

\*Jlll: ka c Enclosure bcc: Messrs. Robert N, Miller E. D. North C. W. Tayler J. P. Duckl'lOrth J. R. Clark.../

B. G. Bechhoefer, Esquire G. Anastis, New York State Atomic &

Space Development Authority

• LOW LEVEL LIQUID WASTES FUTURE INVESTIGATIONS

• 111681

1. Problem Areas The low level liquid waste system has been in operation since late May, 1971. The goal of this operation is the removal of radioactive strontium and cesium from liquid effluents so that the liquid effluents will meet the requirements of 10 CCR 20, Appendix B, Table II. While the system has demon-strated the capabilit.v, and is currently removing some 95% of these materials, the radioactivity levels have not been reduced to the extremely low levels required to meet the goal: approximately one-quarter of MPC for each of

. four isotopes, Cs-134, Cs-137, Sr 89, and Sr-90.

The treatmen~ system presently reduces Cs-137 to 6xlO- 6 ~Ci/ml or about one-third of MPC, and it reduces Sr-90 to about 5xlO- 6 vCi/ml or about 15 times MPC. Some fluctuation about these lpvels has been observed. The lowest weekly composite sample was analyzed at 2.5xlO -7 ~Ci/ml for Sr-90. This represents 84% of NPC. It would appear that the system is reasonably close to the goal for cesiUM, but that additional time and work will be required to further reduce the strontium levels.

One of the primary problems that has been encountered has been the fail-ure of the resins to withstand the nitric acid regeneration without degradation This problem was entirely unexpected in that the Oak Ridge National Laboratory work did not encounter this problem.

2. Approach to Solving the Problem At the star. "'1 of plant operations two separate problems were immediately encountered, a stabliity problem in the flocculator-clarifier, and a resin degradation problem in the ion-exchange beds. The former has apparently been resolved: the degradation problem is still with us.

• 1116B2 The basic approach has been to first determine the cause of the deara-dation and to rectify the problem since without effective ion-exchange, the system cannot be expected to attain the extremely low levels of ranin-activity desired. Once the degradation problem has been resolved, it will be possible to optimize tile operation to achieve lower levels and/or to in-crease bed life, both of \'ihich are highly desirable. Other subsidiary areas of investigation pertain to the flow characteristics through the bed, channeling of the bed, tile effect of physical swelling and shrinking of the bed during operation, the effect of additives to the flow, and the amount and type of clays to be used in the operation.

NFS has negotiated a contract with Battelle Northwest Laboratories to provide assistan ... e in solving these problems. Preliminary information on the basis of the design of the facility and the design dra\~ings has been furnished to Battelle. Dr. Earl Wheelwright of Battelle is scheduled to arrive at West Valley on December 13, 1971, for several days to provide assistance in the areas of non-ionic species, hydraulics, kinetics of reaction and the temper-ature dependence of the ion-exchange reaction.

Dr. John Holmes of Oak Ridge National Laboratory has been consulted fre-quently and a monthly review session has been arranged with him. Dr. Holmes has participated extensively in the Oak Ridge work on low level wastes and his assistance has been, and continues to be, extremely helpful.

NFS has had, and continues to have, extensive consultations with the resin manufacturer, Diamond-Shamrock Chemical Company, the only manufacture of the resin used in the Oak Ridge work. Diamond-Shamrock has kindly consented to prepare batches of the CS-IOO resin used at Oak Ridqe, even thouah this resin via:; discontinued as a commercial item some years ago due to the lml demand for this resin.

• * . 111683

3. Samp 1i n9 Proqram Two separate and differently oriented sampling programs have been set up. ", l/~);~*t~*

The first is the routine sampling of the system effluents that is

'.i>

., ~;.\. ~

performed three times per day at about the fO))OI'ling times:

0200 - gamma scan - cesium-137 1400 - pH, hardness, gross 1800 - gamma scan - cesiuiJ1-137 With a five day life on the bod, this sampling progranl will provide 15 data points per bed for each cycle. At the same times other samples are taken throughout the system such as feed to the flocculator, feed to the filter and feed to the ion-exchange be(ls.

A second sampling program around a single ion-exchange bed is to be initiated with the change to sulfuric acid regeneration on tIle Cs-100 resin. It is planned to study closely the OF across the bed during the entire cycle. Samples of the feed and the effluent \*Ii)) be taken and analyzed each 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> beginning 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> after the bed goes on streanl.

These samples will be sent to an outside laboratory for cesium and stron-tium analyses to determine the OF over the cycle as well as the Cs to Sr ratio throughout the cycle.

4. Promising Areas of Investiqation The most promising area is in the effective regeneration of the resins without degrading their capacity for cesium and strontium. Nitric acid, even in the low concentrations used in the process, has an undeniable effect on the resins, both ARC-3S9 and Cs-100. Although the system was deSigned for nitric acid regeneration, based upon the Oak Ridge work, it has been possible to modify the system to handle dilute sulfuric acid in the regeneration cycle.

• 11168~

This will eliminate the oxidizing environment while providing good elution of the hardness and radioactivity on the beds. Laboratory tests at both Hest '.

Valley and Erwin have not shown resin degradation upon exposure to sulfuric' acid.

Due to the extensive use of stainless steel in the system, it is not feasible to shift to hydraulic acid for regeneration.

NFS has been addillg stable strontium to the low level wastes since October 24, 1971, to isotopically reduce the concentration of radioactive strontium. Since the resin shuuld not differentiate between the isotopes, and since the beJ should reduce stl'ontiul;] to a given level, irrespective of the isotope involved, this should significantly reduce the level of radio-active strontiu~ in the effluents.

Due to the 1engthy ti me requi n,d for s tront i um analyses as I'le 11 as the holdup in Lagoons 1 and 2, no data are presently available to indicate the effectiveness of this action.

NFS has been conducting experiments with a pilot rlant si zed bed in series with the main plant beds to determine the effect of adding a second ion-exchange bed in series with the main plant bed for cleanup purposes. Depending upon the res:;lts of these experiments coupled with a cost benefit analysis of results versus cost of installation, this approach mayor may not be desirable.

Some preliminary '-Iork has been performed and further work is scheduled in the use of alternative adsorbents in the flocculator-clarifier and in the elution cycle.

One adsorbent that appears promising is the natural zeolite, clinootilolite This material can be used in conjunction with or substituted for the grundite clay used in the Oak Ridge work. This material could be used in the flocculator clarifier or it could be added to the hold tank used for collection of the eluant. In the latter location it could tie up the strontium and cesium eluted from the ion beds and reduce the load on the flocculator following regeneration.

• 111685 This slurry would then be slowly fed to the flocculator to be centrifuged out with the normal sludge.

5. Alternatives There are a limited number of alternative approaches to the resolution of this problem and several options that could be classified as alternatives or as adjuncts to the present system.

The alternative approaches were considered some two years ago and of these the present system was chosen as the most feasible for various reasons.

The most attractive alternative, of course, was the first choice, th~

deep well disposal of these effluents for which the site is particularly.

and perhaps uniquel~well suited. While this arproach was not accentable under the original NFS application. it seems entirely appropriate to consider it in the present instance under the changed conditions where 94% of the long lived isotopes are being removed in the system. If the effluents from the present system were to be disposed of in the PotSdam-Theresa. the primary isotopes in the effluents wou~ be ruthenium and tritium. The half lives of these materials are 1 year, and 12 years, respectively, thus the materials would decay away at a rapid rate and would not constitute a perpetual hazard.

In view of the difficult, if not impossible, chemical recovery of these isotopes, the deep well disposal of low level liquid effluents deserves reconsideration.

It is the ~ effective means of disposal of tritium and it presents a com-plete solution to the cleanup of the surface waters below the plant.

• 111686 Other alternative solutions that were considered b'c not adopted were evaporation of the wastes, and chemical treatment by other methods. Evapor~

ation is the most expensive in both capital and operatin9 costs of all systems con-sidered and the alternative chemical methods did not appear and had not been- demon-strated' to be very effective. All things considered, the best alternative was the one adopted, flocculation combined with ion-exchange.

There are a few adjunct options that might possibly prove economically and technically feasible.

The use of clinoptilolit~ in either or both the flocculator and the eluant stream hcs been discussed.

The use of a second stage ion-exchange bed is under investigation.

Another adjunct option is the addition of carbonate ion to the system to improve the removal of hardness in the flocculator. A glance at the solu-bility product of strontium carbonate will show that the addition of carbonate in economic qU3ntities will not be effective in precipitating strontium. It is possible, though r.0t particularly attractive, to substitute sodium carbonate for the sodium hydroxide used to neutralize the effluents in the interceptor.

Another option, that has previously been mentioned, is the addition of stable strontium to isotopically dilute the radioactive strontium. This was begun on October 24, 1971. Due to the large holdup in Lagoons 1 and 2, coupled with the necessary time delay in obtaining strontium analyses, no data are available to even indicate what the effectiveness of this option might be. From a theoretical pOint of view, it is the most promising option that has been devised.

• g.". -

I-

• 111687

6. Anticioated Improvements There are two areas, where, in the long run, improvem~nts in recovery will be obtained. The first area is within the main plant and the second is in the waste system itself.

NFS is presently installing and has made a submittal covering a revised aci d recovery sys tem. Thi s revi sed sys tem I-Ii 11 reduce the carry-over of str::ntium and cesium to the interceptors and the liquid waste system by pro-viding inlproved de-entrainment in evaporators and the acid fractionators.

This step alone is expected to reduce the strontium-cesium load on the re-covery system by better than 90%. Caution should be exercised, however, in translating this to a 90% reduction in the strontium-cesium level in the effluents from the ~aste system. The reduction in load will in tUrn reduce the already extremely low concentration of these isotopes to the point where the ion-exchange beds might not be more effective than at present. In any case, the installation of the new evaporators and the new fractionating column will not be immediately effective since they will not go on stream until some time in 1972.

The near term improvements in effective removal of strontium from the effluents then m~st come from modifications wtihin the system itself. A com-prehensive study on many fronts which appear promising is underway. While it is all-lays somewhat risky to predict performance without experience, a decrease in concentration by one order of magnitude l'ias made in September, and with the intensive study and numerous options presently available, it is expected that a further reduction by anotr.er order of magnitUde might result.

/

1116 Ii I.'

\,.'ASI*tlNG1*ON. D.C. 1.0::'t.~

MAY 2 7 1970

~*.*::o ~O:j::::::/~ ~.,. l*~illc::-;.  ?~csident

~~\.:C:::'(!~;;.'" 1:'l!Gl Sc~'/iccs, Inc"

\~icetc~ ~i~~3 africa Building St~~tc 906

\'

iis lc~=cr \~ill confir~ our May 15, 1970 discussion witll .

,'OL~, 1*;2S5:C5. 3cchl:ocfc:: ~nd Lc\,,5.s and Dr. North concerning

':.'<1stc :cclcClsc5 and envi:;:on:;:ent.;:1 r.:onitoring at the Hest V2~lcy pl.:l~:t.

~y ~~?lic~~ion d~tcd July 9, 1969, you requcsted autho~i

~~tio~ fo~ ~cc?-wcll clisp05Ql of low-lcvel w~stc from ene

1",'!- 'J".L.- i CV

...... v.... ...... _ J , 1

1) .... t....

• ,~t 0 ~l'L"'".. _v (,..4,.. ~1)Dl';_ c., t';on' Y'}""

,....I... \ \,,; t:.J -~('S"oll",';ve to "u""

~ _..:" u..l... \,.0 _

.:~y 3l, i900, lc!:!:cr st.1tin~~ that relcnscs .fro::: t:1C !*:FS

• _;::'.:c:-lt sl:olllc2 ~e 5i;:;nific.:l:-1tly reduced. After caref'.!l co:-o-

... Jl"io" c 1.- c'.\ ..... ';-'1"'-

"'**~(*n-"

.... '-'.,._-.. 0; "- '*0*' i --" .... '-i '"'!""\-L*'c~"".jon';t J

'0"5 b""co~"

. . . . . ' '" '" ... C; " ' - , ,-~

\.-"",*,-~o,:""

~ ~ *v *.*,,1~"';-'

_ ...... _ l,..O. 1.0 ..... '-; to "'u;,l~C !......,I . . . ~ 11'e"'1"n'

.. u.... "'no' sar..L.. c " y ~",';sca' c.. ~ _ Co, .... 'DY

.. ~\,..~)

... ...,-..,_ *.".10,;,. -.,.,__ 1 "---,,,..,1 y", l' '~O'" b"" **c"'olv",d in t',c u_ :JV...,l(........ \ ..L.._..L.. ,~""" \,;; "-.;) '- _. I. nea-J... .;.u'*****e _ ..... ~_ *

.. C c:-.. ~. . ~o~" t:1C~C£Or"'c, .:.ct on your :.. c~ucst at,*this ti::1e.

-~~:. . . ::.. :.:o:~.:i.:-.:; ?:-:J6:*c7::~S  :::"c.v.~ S~10~*.'11 a:l .l.". ,.,..,.c:=c.~s~ __ _ or< _ .... . _- : .............

..;..: 0.,,..___ .... .; . v_ -,r

.:.~ *"'13

....... e""\'~

• .... . _ _ .....\.1""'\ ....... _ -- .... -

... ;...:........ 0'::'

..... -:....~

... ... --. ,.,,1 - - -

"_"";'~~""". ~';:ni1c the. oose::vcc5 levels

,:,:;  ::~cio.::..c:i"",':'::y co :10:: ?r~sc~: .~-:l i . '1l_r:iccic:!c(?* ?'.:~lic n~.:l: ."1

• • • . . *,..0 ..-'_1.:

~ : -"'1 .. , -'\I'"')\r

~ ** _ _ _ ~-:.,

__ .... -'..,'""')

'- 0 .....

____ ..... -,.* OL'" * ... ""OS';

~ __ --i""n

_ ~ t-o;"'-:-'f""

,.. **** _ SO; _=" __ c.; .*

r":T'\J.* ..:.; ",,-,-~

-\.,.. ..... .. *-*

10.- ... _...*0--

.. J. -',,,,

............. i -'V..,1

_\,,; \,;_ 0. 0_ -*"C*~O"'C-.;V.;

_\,.0. _ 100- .... _ _ _ """... c;

_ SC --***;*~*C: -..,

""'--c~ 1.."", -:..,,,

,-_,iii;;

.. **-"...**5*

_'-'_ ..... '" ......  ; S:.., .....

.. v'-l_

• lC~ . "'l -"'I..,

0 ... _~C_, -n

<.Po 0"

.... ...._ ~**.......

"" t wl"~

,-_.1.; -~

.. ",C :"1 ...... ~ ..

• • 1~,-"L S ~CC~_.:.- :=~.

.:~ . ti. c::s ,;':'/.::::-n:':-~S l:"~l.:i.G c£fl~lC:1tS frc~ the pi~nt site s:1culc

__ 2 ::..::v:...5':':: .

'_':"'.:i, :::'::  :'s i::-:?o:.-::.:::,::  ::;1~: you devcIc? .::l::C:::la::c pl.:n to I

\

<:::-0

~~~:~\'~ ~~ :~c c~=lics::

_:1cl cc;:2~~::~.:::ic~s o~ :;:,::ciio,:c::ivicy

---

ryossibl~

... ---.-- ..... - --. ~.

~ncc- --a rc~uccion i:-1 ~~.::n:i::i~s released in liquid

.::::L;,:.::::::.::. . RECEI~ED JUN 2 1970 J. P: DUCI\WORTH

1116'18 MAY 2 'I 12i'O

~:~C D~j~:ct~V2 of t~c 21tcD.ate plnn Sl10uld be to co~?ly with

.. ~~c~di>: J, T~blc II o~ 10 CFn Part 20 for radioactivity in

"::'c;t..::'..C8 2t t~'-..Q-;.(,o::';'.t .2i__:cl5E~_~E~~.!=_h~ ... ~.~.~?on rather thc:n C'):';{,;, ::;<::;:c<::":: .::ts ?rcs~nt:ly ?::ovidcd in your lJ.ccnsc.

':'., , . .,. ... ",...,.,. ":--." y"""

....... .... ~\., .... L,;~J ... I... . . . ~ .... v .......S"')'~i t Ul. ... _ w" D'*o1)os..,l

...... L ) U dcsc**.; ..... 1.*n bri the S_C.9'). e

) ,uL.;

<.:::,0 .scn.:::;t..:_c :';0::: ...... ,

. .., *C''',,***\7

.. 1. .... L,;~..J(.._J

- 2CtJ.011S. , .

'...'0 co*'ri'~c*'" " "teD""S" p:r.o"~"'m

.,,;) .... \,,..1 _

\..

to <.Ie t<l (cn to rcoucc

( ... ..,

1

.. \ ..... ~ ..

. re 1 cases.

e>>40f....'" ,oIr.. 'J..: ... J..'--

1 U r..,11 __

It

_'-v ..... I".._.......

"C"' ":" C" t- .. ~,.., l'lt " ,,'L.'" t .,,..,.,,,t

<J ....... \".; .. i

_1 ** (., \.,;; "'"' .... u\,.; levels is* not '~'n'cc1i (..."tel" ....,.~~ J

~:;:&=tic=~. Plc2se provide a schedule for any stcp~ise .

0?lLictio:-., .:::... d irlcluGe ;m indication of any nucliccs the*

.:,::GuC t :'0:1. 0::: \.';,ici-. ,*,odd i)(; --c:::iPT-insizc'ci-;;t" ,

an'y"gi vcn step.

~ addition to actions to =ccluce thc radioactivity released,

'./0~:" c:"'.vi ~~o::::-, '27: ~:l!. r;.:.~~:=:.9.;..:i..:J.:I. ..l~ ..:f'.. '?.gJ:"~;~ s ~10111d b.~_ ..~):!) n~c..~.(~ ,_

r,-.* .. ,,) "J""~'j':""\'~""J'1 -)'~""'rT-l 5:'0*,'1('1 ~-'I""'\'C1.'

- ** ~ " ** ,/, .* "vc;.u ' .... "'0-'-* ",. ~'*'el .... ", ",,~ r"l'- '-?r.

., :I. **~~""'le L' 1.' a'cn")- ';';c .1 f"... :1. 0 n j ..........

......- . .' c;'"in~'

.:...;,J J"" ... J. ~.,t-;**e ......... _v T"""/")....,C"u*

....... '-.:;...:..:..<.:... .. ~**"\C""'"'\f ........ 0 1:-: I'"....1 e pY'~' ~ ... n~.~l." **,') . . 1 ...'so~o"* .. pc s ..... \*.11_C.l; ~

[.::2 1':o"10r ccul:':jO'C-pl'~scnt in the cnvi;:or~:,icnt as tile result 0'-=  ;.; '1U,-

... t..:~"'~ i cj . ...... "C ":':::~ ..,~ '~:)o""""e .. ::-... ~_ . "cj - .. c*cs <:.,;.0.)1.

In "edition the prorr**..,~

Q ).... ("..1-( ****

stou~d p~ovici0 a oasis for evaluation o[ the effects of radio-

~ctiv:~~y rcle~scd to the cnvircn~cnt, including i~cntificQtion 0:': t:le po~e:1::i.:ll j):',::;:~~:.lYs for ti1C r2cJi_o.n.c.!:..i,:~ty to r(!<!C;l r::::.n,

~.",...1

'- ** ., c'-.**~,

~ ........ . . . <:i,**;

..... - 0'" . , 0"-= - ":r,C

~~~,",l."""'<'> ' .... ':'"'\rr 1"\*'':Oll'*C

\';"i/ ~ ~ oJ to .... e co"le ; ' . '\'I"!o ,., u_'" .... ,.... .....

...... t*: c" ~ -. "1,,

.."' ............. ,,_, .. __ ) __ .............. .;., - -, ~ "'

~-'_ C f' C c~ ,....

..L..... t l'. e r "1 I.:; e "

oJ c 5 to" .... '11""'- C "'0 1.."1_ .....~ " ~ u ~

., t , . ., '.' t... *.,.:  ;;;,

\1 ',--.... C*,_v,," .. ~**"If')c; > .;,,"'1 _ ** ~ -~"\:"'\

• • <.: '- ..... O*1C.,1

• '-' . .'-~<.-'" . ,.. -~ ... -i011 0': ... -:1(j"o"'ct'v":

-<. , ... Q -

"" -:n

"'J ('t-r")"'~

... , ~':::.~" ..

";:;::'o:':c:. [,~:1C: sil~s) i:1 t~c:1!-:!::fcr o~ t:~c l"c:!ciioac:ivi:.:v to hU::~~:1

.:,. . .-.,T C',,.....~ :-::---:'7': '. "" ..........

_~t..J,,",S vl. __ .* ,'.::" _.:as . l c.! .. "G (l;..,.I.:!_,

"".J, ... ....-

c:.:.nci ~11 _'1(,,;~ potC:1",,~a..!.

.... ., ...... ,,-0 ~

rcsu ... :C::1t

...... ~"') ')I"",~,,*c v: ..... ~ ......... v r"", -:.,,.

1... ** ..;; ~ 10.- .... _ _ "

-~------~

...... ~~t.:.::. :cd (~(:sc:::.?  :::'0:1 of t~c c:~?Clnc.cd cnvi4"onz:lcntal :!~oni::o:.-i:1~

~~og~~~ s~c~lci jc sub~i=:ed for our ~evicw.

_...: ~ ..... ..:.. '... ,:)\.,.:

~ r-.... . . ! ... n tJ_ '- ... _  :.:.. ......

• • • """; " 0 .~ _ -... c................

....... _ ~ 0':: _ v.....

~0 - '1 0 J. r: f-(') 5" 1.::

-1 .... +-- ~- ") -s hL...~L.\';_,

.... *.*.*C ~_~ "_' C*

---

\,,;-.

, f"'.- -~ .....

Sincerely,

]~ ..~ t'...,..,-..--

I;"'" ....-.'

lY;;:ll JO:"1:1son Actin:; Di-::~ct:o:c Division of ~lat~rials Licc~si~;

. 111467 WHEATON PLAZA [3UILDING. SUITt;: 9 0 6 WHEATO'~. MARYLAND 2 0 9 0 2 AReA CODE 301-Te:t...CPHONE 9 3 3

• 5 4 4 0 Junc 29, 1970 Hr. Lyall Johnson Acting Director Divison of ~!aterials Licensing United States ALonlic El1crgy Commission Washing ton, D. C. 20545 D~ar Mr. Jol1nson:

This h'il] .1cknUlyj edge receipt of your letter of :!ay 'J.7, 1970 cOl1ccrnin;" 1*:<15 te relcases and ('nv j ronmentill mon i tor 1ng Ll t the \'!es t Valley l'L'nt.

h'e nole Hith cOllsider:lhl(! dls,')proint~lel1t your state;:1('nl. that our propos:ll of J\lly, 19(,9, for clCl'l' 1*:e11 dispos.:'ll of 1011 ] ('v(,l wasle's from the \'!est \'alley 1'l:111L ra1.ses cC'rtain qlJe~;tions I,hieh arc not likely to b~ resolved in the ne:lr future and that, thvre-fore, some alternative plan shoul'd be deve]orwd at tht' car] ie"t possible date to olltain a reduction in tIle qU.:1ntity and concentra-tions of rndioactivity released in liquid effluents.

As you pointed out in your letter, the ohserved levels of radioactivity do not pres.ent 3n i:n;:lediate public health proble::!.

In vic\.J of our anticipated schedule or reprocessing for tIle ne:,t two to three years, taking into consic(.!r.:lti0n both the volu;;;e of reprocessing and the n<lture of the fuels, \oJe :Ire certain that no public health problei:1s \,'ill arise durin;:: this period. \'!c fully agree, ho~evcr, ~ith the conclusion th<lt since you arc unable to approve the deep \*:ell at this ti~le, ir.,I;;ediate steps should be taken to provide an alternative method to reduce the quantities and concentrations of the radioactivity released in the 10H level effluents., ~e arc proposing such an altern<ltive in tllis letter.

As you pointed 0ut. D stcpHisc pro~ram Hill be required to achieve the desired reSlllts.

111438 The studies of alternatives, which we have been ~~king for more than tHO years, disclose that the r::ost feasible alternative is cher.1-ical treatment using naturally occuri~g zeolites to provide ion-exc!lange capability. Tests h'ilicn 1,'C arc pcrio!-;;;ing and the published literature indicate that this syste"l should result i:1 a reduction of at least 907..

in the discllargcs of strontiu~ and cesiu~ to surface waters. The radio-active strQntiu~ on Cattaraugus Crc~~. w!licll is the closest point to the plant to Hhicll there is public access, would be approximately 2% of 10 CFR 20 Ij:.li.ts. There ilrl' indication!; in the literature that the reduction could be consid~rably srl'i,tc*r.

Attached llereto as Annex I is' a detailed statement of tile pro-posed chemical trc:Jt;::ent syst(';:l [or reducing r.:ldioactive liquid discllarges from the Illant.

We expect to have sufficient data in 60 days to permit the design and construction of a full sC;lle treal;~cnt plant. We believe that installation of the trcatr:ent plant can be CO!::llleted in six to nine months [rom the time of your approval.

\~e fc'cl, gi 'en (lie prc!;clIt stnte o[ til(! art of chemical. lrC'atrn(!nl:

of 10\, level I*.'i!!*;tes, til:lt thl! stcpI:j,;e apiJroilCh is bo~h l1ecl'ssary and feasible. He I,!ollld .like to point out that lh(' ~'tated objective of meet in;; 10 erR 20 L;:lits at lhe LI1;oon OllL[;,ll '.*:Quld be equivalent to say O.O/.~ oi :',1'( in Catt.l1"iiUgus Cr(:cl;. This l(:\'el I*.'ould be as much ilS 50 Urn,,!; morc strill['.iellt th.1n the ap;,,,rc:ltly .1cceptable: levelf; !Jcing propo:;ecl for othel' Ilucleilr in:;Llll;ltions.

As to an in:provcd monitoring-prc;,;rall1. Anne:, 2 describes our e:x-panded n:onitor.i.Il;; pro);ran1 to provide: rcliilblc identification and quantit.1tive "lCaSUrel1l('nt of the: principal discharges to the environ-ment. It also identifies potential p.ltlll*:,:yS for tile radioacU.vity to reilcll man and e:stimates the resulling exposures. As we pointed out in the ,\nnl'x Eluch of the research rec;uired for the progrnr:l has al-ready been co~pleted and tIle improved environmental monitoring pro-gram Slloulel be operative promptly a~ter its approval by the Commiss-ion. It should be noted that ilS the overall objective is approached, the need for SUCII an extensive program will diminish.

\~hi1e it is not feasible to set up a liquid r.1onitoring systei:l which \..'111 eli fferentia te in dail y rei1d ings anlong the various types of isotopes-released to Cattarilugus Creek, we arc able, however, through established sampling procedures to make a reasonably accurate estimate of 'the isotopic contents of the discharges.

111459 He believe that it is premature to s-uggest in this letter re-vised Technical Specifications concerning the discharge of low level liquid effluents. At an early date I.;e expect to be in a position to make meaningful suggestions.

As stated at the ~eeting of ~ay 15, 1970, we expect to be in contact witll the Division of ~i~terial Licensjn~ in ~crking out in detail and bringing into effect the plans Ivhich I,'e <1rc submitting.

Very truly yours,

Z;;'~~RVICES' INC.

f,/-z£jl/( ~/11~

Robert N. ~il]er PRESIIJE;\T t

I

111~1 A.\,NEX I LOH LEVEL LIQUID HASTE TREAn1E~"T NFS had concluded in its early studies of low level liquid waste treatment that of those systems providing satisfactory decon-taminatio~precipitation-scavenging treatment was probably the most attractive approach considering cost of installation and op-eration. Reasonably good decontamination factors have been re-ported and tllo operation is relatively simple, reliable and subject to automatic control. Our most recent studies have confirmed this opinion.

A literature search was performed for NFS by 8attelle North-west Laboratory, and a bibliograpllY of literature available at Host Valley is attached in the Appendix.

The follc~ing general conclusions were reached following the literature search:

1. Reasonable capacities and cecontamin~tion factors can be obtained for exchange techniques (resin~ zeolites or clays) only when the waste is effectively pretreated to remove algae, organics, detergents and turbidity.

Detergents interfere with chemical treatments at levels of 5 ppm and ruin processes at 15-20 ppm. Complp.xing agents such as EDTA or polyphosphates are very detrimental and pI! control is i!'1portant.

J..J..l.i:t'l

3. C1inopti1o1ite has been proven at Hanford and Idaho for high removal of cesium and strontium in pool \~ater and alkaline condensates.

4. Standard water treatment can provide overall decontam-ination factors as high as ten.

5. Sr coagulation as phosphate is nat effective for eff1u-ents containing high solids or detergents. Co-precipitation of Sr with Ca is effective, especially in a multi-stage precipit-ator.

6. Large scale plants using coagulation-flocculation have been operated successfully at ORNL (15,000 and 300,000 gpd),

I1anvell (15,000 gpd) and Trombay (200,000 gpd). Since coagu!at-ion is ineffective in removing soluble activity, scavenging and exchange treatment is ~Jded. Sludge was maintained at 0.15-0.3%

of the volume treated.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (O~\L-3863) has demonstrated a 15,000 gallon per day pilot using scavenging, precipi-tation and ion-exchange. The process demonstrated the following decontamination factors:

Contamination Decontamination Factor Gross .-{. 17 Gross (\ 11 Cesium 1200 Strontium 1400 Ruthenium 7.6 Rare Earths 580

111472

, Preliminary tests at Hest Valley confirmed that these DF's could be achieved on NFS effluents. The DF's for strontium and cesium were somewhat lower than the Oak Ridge data but this is believed to be due to equipment differences rather than a basic process difference.

Both Hanford and Idaho have used a naturally occurring zeo-lite, clinoptilolite, for the removal of strontium and cesium from low level wastes. It is highly specific for these ions and is reportedly insensitive to other ions such as calcium. For this reason the basic Oak Ridge process was modified to substitute clinoptilolite for the grundite clay and the ion-exchange system.

r Overall DF's obtained with the modified system without the alumina column were [;lore than 15 for cesium and more than 103 for strontium

-4 -3 at concentrations of 7./j};lO flCi Cs-137/ml and 5.1,xlO rlCi Sr-85/ml.

Since this system appears to furnish adequate decontamination and is subject to rapid installation using standard water treatment equipment, this process has been adopted for further ~evelopment at NFS. This process has been tested on clean solutions of strontium and cesium, interceptor solutions and lagoon samples. DF's on clean solutions were significantly higher indicating that Ivith proper pre-treatment of the waste liquids, the process should provide the nec-essary removal of strontium and cesium. Some removal of ruthenium should result, although no data is available for this isotope.

L

1114~J

, It will be necessary to run pilot plant scale tests on lagoon solutions prior to the final design of the installation since plugging of the filter bed occurred in some of the tests. This was probably due to the presence of algae and some suspended solids in the lagoon was tes I"hich can be easily fil tered ou t in the treatment plant.

As presently conceived, the treatment plant will consist of the following basic steps:

1. Addition of about 1000 ppm of Fe as FeS04'

2. pH adjustment to about pH9 using 30% NaO!! solution to pre-cipi~atc ferrous hydroxide.

r 3. Flocculation and sedimentation with the addition of about 150 ppm clinoptilclite ground to -100 or -200 mesh.

It will be possible, should the need arise, to take the effluo::!nt from the flocculator througll a fixed bed of-20 mesh clinoplilolitc for further cleanup.

The sludge bed will be Ivithdrawn periodically from the flocculator and filtered through a pressure leaf filter. The cake will be dis-charged to drums which will be buried.

The liquid effluents from the flocculator will also be filtered to remove any trace of solids that might carryover. These solids will also be buried. The total solids discharged is estimated to be about one 55-gal. drum per day.

fIi

11147~

r There are presently t~o locations being considered for the installations of the waste treatment plant: (1) immediately after the interceptors, and (2) between lagoons. The latter location.

seems to be more feasible because of the inprocess storage capacity afforded by lagoons. This would provide surge capacity in case of process or equipment proble~s and would also provide a steady flow to the flocculator. The latter is quite important, for the floc cul-ator can easily be upset by flow fluctuations. Once the bed is set up, it is highly desirable to maintain steady conditions in tIle equipment.

111475 ESTI}~TED SCHEDULE FOR INSTALLATIO;-';

It is believed that the equipment can be designed and installed in from six to nine months following approval of this approacll.

It is estimated that the necessary pilot plant tests can be com-pleted in 60 days. These arc scheduled to begin immediately so that results should be available by September 1.

Preliminary engineering is in progress and requests for quotations for long d:::ivery itel!ls such as the flo(;culator and the filters have been sent out. Engineering is sclleduled for completion hy September 15.

While it is not possible to give a firm construction schedule at th!s time, we arc of the opinion that construction of the necessary building and external facilities might begin on September 15 and be completed by November 30. This schedule will, of course, depend on delivery of the requisite equipment. Delivery can not be estimated at this time.

APPE:\DIX 1 LI::';JTj:~ C!," LO~':-L!*:'.':':L ',,*.-.. ~~'r;*: '!':i::/,.:::;,~:'~::T ~~~.TF~*~l/d, FO}n,,'/d\i);'~D '1'0  :;IJ~;i.!;.'*':~  :"L::*~jl  :,;;:>:':iC:,,;, eit:::;'; 1~-', Jo'ro

(

B. H. J~ercer: Adsorntion of 'J':-flC0. Ion;, fro~ Jnt(,:-:::edi::tl! Lc\'("l Rr:!d:io!!ctive WU!Jtes 1','.' 10:1 Exc!l:c:,r"c, l);;',*iL-liJJ. llc.ttellc-i;Ol"tll',,'cst, IUcillunci, Ha!Jhinl;tO:1, J o.nu<:>.ry 196:J.

J. II. C1ur};e, H. C. J. Hhite, R. F. Cu:;-,ber1Md, o:.d T. D. \']riGht. Inve!;ti'rn.-

tio!1~ into 't~c tJ~e of IO~1 Exch::!lr:-c P.c*si.!'J;' for the jj(lCo:1t~:,,:i.n[l.t1o:1 of :~~!.dio a.ctive Ef;.:,',.~C~)t. F::rt 2. Pile,: P.?['.:Y;: '1':.1::.1::;, /\l;1~~-H-l.905. Ato:-:lic Enc:rGY Researcb J:;stu1.Jlisil::iCnt, Eun'ell, /,pri 1 19l)5.

J. H. Cln.rl:e, R. F. CU1::berlc.::d, c.nd 1,:' J. Sr:lyth. Th~ Tr(':!t~C"nt of Lc".'

Level nr!oic2..ctiyc Effluent bv 0. ?crric E~"c!"o:(icl~ ~!'"ecinitr:tion, J;EHE-i~-)721l.

Atomic Encrw' ilescccrcil istc.blisi;:~cnt, )iCl.r'~'eIl, fipril, 19GG.

L. L. Ames, Jr., und B. H. l"ercer. Unidirectio:1nl Cc:.i u::: Loadi~,-. SCT'~:b!::i:1(":',

o.nd J::IUtiO:l of f:.~ ... r.,O'J Zeolite Col',;::::-:s, B:;'"iL-*{32. i3u.ttelle-iiort.h\:cst, ;*.,ichI<'..:lci, WazhinGtc:l, ::J.y lyGi.l.

B. H. !!,erccr, L. L. Amcs, o.nd R. G. Par%hurst'. R(>!~o"/'1.1 c~ 137Cs fro:; Anr'.li~c Con den" at!' \:n.s t!'f,. E;1\'IL-829. Batte lIe-I: orthwes t, Hi chln!1d, \lush i fl{;tC:; ,

Nove:~bcr 19()().

J. S. 1311cl:iI:Cho..":l. Lnho!"ntor"" Ev:olu:'.tio:1 of ?('o]it:ic l~n:-('ria.l for' P.(":~~'.':r::

Radj.o~ct,i~:0 C0~it'l~1 f:"(")!~1 j\l}:r~J.i.~l(1 ',:,'~.:.:.(' Sol'.:tjo:1s. AH!i-S/.-iI9, l~tla:1tic Hichfie1d iiuni'ord CO::lpc:llY, Hichh,nd, \';nsilinf,t.on, Jo.nuo.rj' 1970.

Opcr:d:ion ";;0 CC:1t~'ol of I0:1-E:':C!1~:1r'e P:-oces!;cs for T:-('(" .. ~:(*nt of P'1.:Er.nc'.:.i*;c vlustes. Technicu.I ileports Series ;;0. 7b, Interno.tiona1 i\t-o:;lic i:nerc:;::

Agency, Vienna, 1967.

Econr::".ico. i:1 !':n!1r:r:ir:r: Rndio:'.ctiy(' \'.' . :!;tc~, Tcch:1ical Reports Series 1';0. 133, Intel'n ..~tio:1"'-l I\t-o:~ic EnerGY JiCC!1cJ', Vienna, 1968.

P. E. Pottier. Chc~l COol T:rc~t~C'i!t of Rc.dio:1ctj~."(~ h~c.~tc~, Tec:~nicn.l P.cpo=-t~

Serie:. No. 89, Internn.ticnc.l f,t-o::-,ic E:-,ercy AGency, Vien:.e., 1968.

R. l!. Burns, J. l!. Clnrl:e, T. D. HriGht, und J. E. J,:ye.tt. "Present Pr~~ctice:;

in the 'frcatl~ent of Liquid \';(!stes at the Atc::1ic Ener[y j\esenrch ;:;stn'.:lis~':::~:1::,

II an:c 11 , " pp. 17-29. PI'nC'U ::c~ in t.!:c ';.':-r:"t:~~:1 t 0f I.e'; nntl I~':.("r:::~ ::: .".t.c-Level H.'~(li.[):~('t.i\*c ~*}:!~;tc;;, Intc!"r:~tio::~l J\to::1ic i::ccrCY J\ccnc:t, Vicnn~, lSit-~':.

B. Guudc:"r;",-ck arid J. E, Lundhy. "Haste Treatr.lent at the Institute fo:" /,to:::ic EnerGY, ':Jdlcl"," Ibid. pp. 1 111-1G1.

R. II. 13\.<:"1::;, ,T. l!. C)[,:"::c, und T. D. h'rir:ht. "Filt:-::ticI1 !llld Ion-l';~:C!l:~nl;c PllU1ts in lJ~c nt t!.e Ato:::ic Enerey Res('(!rch ;~st,1.b1i:;h;::cnt, Hun,'ell,"

Ibid. n'. :'::3-2::;lt.

~11477

, 2 1I. r:rausc and O. J:cutwich. "The Trcat::1Cnt of LOII'-Lcvcl [<I1Ci :*~cdiu::1-Lc\'C'l Liquid i1ndio:lctivc h'l1:.;tcs I1t the r:c.rls1*uhc Jluclcar HC:JcG.rcl! Ccntre," Ibid.

pp. 317-337.

K. E. Co*.... ser and L. C. Lashcr. "Oper[ttiollal Expericnce in the Treatr.:cnt of Radioactive Haste at On.k Riuce ;;o.'.;ional Laboratory D...'1d Brookhnven 11ntionu.l Laboratory," Ibid. pp. 381-1~Ol.

C. D. !u::berso:1 and D. H. Rhoden. "Trcat-ccnt of Intcr:::cdic.te and Lm,'-LcYel Radioactive Wo.stes at the llational Rcactor TestinG Sto.tion (nRTS)," Ibirl.

pp. l'l9-437.

R. 11. Girdler. "Handlinc; of Lo',,; c.nd J*:cdium-Lcvcl Liquid i*luste at the Sa.vn..'1n<3.h lIiYer Plnnt," Ibiel. pp. 477-)196.

R. E. Blu.nco, H. Do.vis, Jr., il. H. Godbee, L. J. KinG, J. J. Roberts, G. J. All'.ire, E. R. Iri:.;h, n.'1d D. H. )*~crccr. "Hecent Develor:~cnts in Treating Low u:1d Intermediate-Level Radioactive Waste in the United States of A.":',erica," Ibid. pp. 793-839.

A B. H. Mercer. Trcat::1cnt of R"dio~ctivc Wn~tc::; bv Ion Excl~anrc, pr~sented at AIChE meetinG in PortlD...'1d, OreGon, j,ur;u:;t 2h-2T, 19G9.

J. M. 5karpelos. PrOrress in TT~~t~cnt of R R~dio~ctivQ CG~drn~ntp ;.,t . .~;. t e ,

mv-7917 1,. !In.'1ford I\to;~il: Products Opcrr:.tion, Jlichlc!.nd, \*,'",::;hillGt.on, Octo'ber 1963.

"Removal of Radi03ctivity by Wntcr-Trectrncnt Processes," pp. 155-202, Lo-"'-L:_~vcl H::~!io:lctiyc 'dn.:.tC'!';, T]1ci!'" !!~"~Hl]ir.r":, T:-c~t.r-.C:1t, ~!:1(1 Disnos~.1, by C. P. Strcul.J, U. G. N"or:-.ic Enc!'w' CO::l::lis:;ion, 196 1,.

"Treatment on 5ite-Chernico.l Precipito.tion," Ibid. pp. 235-259.

"Treatment on 5i te - Ion Excho.nge and Adsorption," Ihid. pp. 261-288.

UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C:. 205'-

December 17. 1971 COpy Docket No. 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. P. Duckworth Plant Manager Box 124 -

West Vall~. New York 14171 And New York Atomic and Space Development Authority ATTN: Mr. James Cline Genera 1 Manager 230 Park Avenue Change No. 16 New York. New York 10017 License No. CSF-l Gentlemen:

This refers to Nuclear Fuel Services' letters dated August 13. 1971.

October 15. 1971. October 29. 1971. and November 12. 1971. regarding changes in Technical Specifications 4.4.4. 4.5.3. and 4.11 of Provi-sional License No. CSF-l to authorize-transfer from shipping containers to in-process storage vessels and the processing of plutonium nitrate-uranyl nitrate solutions (Category 10 fuel) at the West Valley.

New York Facility.

We have reviewed your proposed changes as identified above and agree that they are necessary to authorize transfer from shipping containers to in-process storage vessels and processing of Category 10 fuel. In

-addition. we have found it necessar,y to incorporate the contents of your letters of August 13.1971. October 15.1971. and October 29.1971.

as a new Technical Specification 7.5 to describe special operational and administrative procedures to be followed for Categor,y 10 fuel. Technical Specification 3.1 has also been modified for conformity. All of these matters have been discussed with NFS personnel.

We have also reviewed the information from Nuclear Fuel Services on the low-level waste treatment plant submitted by letters dated December 1.

and December 8. 1971. We find that the releases of radioactivity in the plant effluents will not be significantly influenced by processing Cate-gory 10 fuel and that the following interim waste management controls are acceptab1e: -

COpy

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., and New York Atomic and Space Development Authority A. NFS shall minimize effluent releases to the environs and in any ease limit releases such that:

1. The concentration of Cs-137 in the liquid waste at the point of release from the lagoon system should not exceed 2 x 10- 5 uCi/ml.

2. The concentration of radioactivity in the cattaraugus Creek should not exceed either:

a) Ten percent (lOS) of the prorated concentrations listed in Appendix B, Table II, 10 CFR Part 20 averaged over the SEFOR processing period; or b) Twenty percent (20%) of the prorated concentrations listed in Appendix B, Table II, 10 CFR Part 20 for any weekly composite sample taken during the SEFOR processing period in accordance with Technical Specification 5.1.1.

3. If the radioactive concentration exceeds either 1. or 2. above, then NFS shall:

a) Taka such action as is necessary to come into prompt compliance, b) Make an investigation to identify the cause or causes for such levels of radioactivity.

c) Define and initiate a program of action to reduce such levels, and d) Report these actions to the Commission on a timely basis.

Information concerning the continuing efforts by Nuclear Fuel Services to improve performance of the low-level waste facility has been presented in the submittals from NFS dated December 1 and December 3. 1971. and in discussions with NFS representatives. Although we realize that your release values have been below MPC in Cattaraugus Creek. we expect the performance of the low level waste treatment plant to be improved as expeditiously as possible so as to limit cesium and strontium in line with Technical Specification Change No. 15. IQ order that we may follow your progl'9ss in resolving this matter. you shijuld submit a monthly report to the Division of Materials Licensing covering the status of progress being made. The first of these reports should be submitted by January 15. 1972. In addition. though we recognize the difficulties associated wi~~ accurately predicting the progress of stUdies on low level waste. a report should be submitted within 30 days describing the scope.

COpy

Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc ** and New York Atomic and Space Development Authority copy goals. and schedule of actions to be taken to reduce the activities of releases of liquid releases. The near term goal for liquid effluent releases should be to comply with Technical Specification Change No. 15 for liquid effluents by July 1*. 1972. The objective. however. remains that of meeting concentrations equal to those set forth fn Appendix B.

Table II of 10 CFR Part 20 at the point of release from the lagoon as stated in our letter of May 27. 1970. We will be in contact.with you in specific regard to Technical Specification Change No. 15 in the near

~~re. .

We have determined that the changes in the Technical Specifications designated as Change No. 16 (as set forth on enclosed pages 6. 20. 21a.

22. 22a. 23. 24a. 25. 37. 38. 39 and 77). do not present significant hazard considerations not described or implicit in the NFS Final Safety Analysis Report. and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safe~ of the public will not be endangered.

A copy of the Safety Evaluation by the Division of Materials Licensing relating to Change No. 16 is enclosed.

Pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as amended. and the regula-tions of Tftle 10. Code of Federal Regulations. Chapter I. Parts 2 and

50. we have authorized changes to Technical Specifications 3.1. 4.4.

4.5. and 4.11 to Provisional License No. CSF-l and incorporated Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.'s letters 6f August 15. October 15. and October 29.

1971. as a new section 7.5 of the Technical Specifications.

FOR THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION S. H. Smiley. Director Division of Materials Licensing

Enclosures:

1. Change No. 16. pgs. 6. 20.

21a. 22. 22a. 23. 24a.

25. 37. 38. 39 and 77

2. Safe~ Evaluation cc: Mr. B. G. Bechhoefer. w/enc1.

Mr. O. M. Ruebhausen. w/encl.

Dr. E. D. North. e/encl.

Mr. Robert N. Miller. w/encl.

COpy

3.1.2 Possession Limits The quantity of materials authorized by Specification 3.1.1 shall be Umited so that the .pecial nuclear uterial at the facility at one time does not exceed the follow1nl:

21,000 ldlolrams of U-23S-3,200 ldlolrams of U-23S 4,000 ldlolrams of Plutoni ...

3.1.3 Form of Materials Katerial Categories 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 9 authorized 1n Specification 3.1.1 uy be in those forms required for. (a) the flow of uterial through the plant ~escrib.d in Section 1.3 and (b) related research and/or development work.

Katerial Categories 5 and 7 authorized in Specification 3.1.1 uy be Teceived and retained in the fuel .torage pool in the form in which thai" &re ra;:a1vad, but .ire not to be cOiwertecl into .my vtl..", LucID until tankage which may be necessary for storage of the processing waste. from these categories bas been completed and approved by the United States Atomic Energy Commission.

katerial Catelory 10 authorized in Specification 3.1.1 uy be received in ahippinl packag.s authorized by the USAEC and storage shall be in accordance with technical Specification 4.10.1.3. Tran.fer to proce**

storage and proces.ing of Cat.gory 10 fu.l shall b. in accoTdance with Technical Sp.cification. 4.4, 4.5, 4.11 and 7.5.

Ba.e.

'lb. facility bas been cOD.tructed witb a capability to pl'oce.s tbe categorie. of nuclear fuel .pecifi.d in 3.1.1. ~o~. and to accommodat.

the byproduct. . . . ociated therewitb except fol' wast.. d.rived fro. the cat.gori*** 0 .pecifi.d in 3.1.3, P&I'agraph 2.

The pos**** ion +iDlt** pecified in 3.1.2 are derived fro. the following

..sumption.:

(a) the 924 canist.r .pac.. inth. fuel pool are filled with canUure .ach of which contain 10 kg of U-215 in addiUOD to the Pu and U-233 which could be produc.d by a 40%

burnu? of this quantity of U-23S at a convenion ratio of 0.5,

~-- ..

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 90

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 91

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 92

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 93

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 94

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 95

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 96

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 97

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 98

If this specification is.found to be exceeded, no further fissionable material will be added to the rework system until the situation is corrected; and the remedial action .ust be taken immediately.

(QulDse No. 16)

"".- -.~ .;.-

• . ,--s.:_ *.. -. _ ....... - : . _ . . . . . . . . . .

..... .: _:" *. ; _ _ _ - __ .,. ... :.a-.A_. "'_ ; ."-..-... 0" _ _: . __

".'!". * * . ..0 .

'- -- ~. .: ~ ......... -- --

......;. .. ~- -...

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 100

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 101

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 102

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 103

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 104

111478 EXP Iu'\DED E:';VIROX:lE;UAL HO(,'ITORI~G PROG~'0!

OBJECTIVE Meaningful enviroru~ental monitoring for any nuclear facility and more particularly a reprocessing facility such as ~uclcar Fuel Scrvices Plant at West Valley, New York, is not a program to study tIle fate of all radionuclides released to til'=! environ;,. Rather the program should monitor the key j ndicators fror.l the stand point of allOl~able conccntra-tions or overall abundance and relate the concentrntion of other radio-nuclides Lo these.  ;,rs vlill utilize :lVaiJablc e}:l'crimt!ntal or ilpplied work done by I>umerous v.'orkers in the henl th :1l1c1 sa f e ty, rad iochemis t ry, nuclear physics, amI other related diRciplines as I'lell as its own data.

BACKr.Rou:m The KFS envirorunental program'beg~n in July, ]963 (3 years before startup of plant) to determine background radiation present in air, sur-face water, ground water, milk, silt, soil, preCipitation, and vegetation.

Follo\~ing tl*;o years of data collection, the samples found to be most in-fluenced by nuclear fallout were air, surface, water, milk, silt, and pre-cipitation.

The program in usc at ti::le of plant startup included all the sant-pIes which were found to rapidly respond to releases in air and I,ater from the plant, gross activity measurements, and l:leasurement of the more limit-ing radionuclides, such as 90Sr .

111479 Over the past four years, the NFS program has been expanded to include isotopes of current interest in environmental concentrations and the development of instruments capable of measuring these low levels.

For ex~~?lc, in 1968 XFS added 129 1 to its routine program because of

~

it~ relatively low recommended concentration even though our calculations reveillcd no likelihood of reaching this concentration in the environs.

Because instrument sensiti.vity v.'JS not 10l~ enough at that time Lo mcasure 1-129 COllcen t r,1 tion a t the site boundary, (:oncen tra tions in the stack e[ f luen t \oIere :neasured and the concen tr il tion I~as calculated by dilu tion.

NOl~ . tI

"'l.

1 ~mprovc.:

d 129 I . ..

scnsJ.t~v.lty, t IIe measure d .

concentrat~on I

nt tIe si Le boundary is ut;ain provided in the progr.:lr.l.

In 1968, to be able to s.tudy tIle exposure [rom fallout and gaseollS effluents to persons livillG ilbout tIle site, tllermoluminescenc dosi~~Lcc~

were placed at the thirty-t*,..'o ne;;.rest neighbors around the perimeter.

Data collectc*d I*Jas not l:lCa:lingful; hOl~ever, ev,1luation of this technique is continuing. Other equipment has recently been purchased which will directly measure external radiation exposure due to Kr-8S.

In 1969, because of tIle increased interest in concentrations of radioactivity in Buttermilk Creek, the Franks Creek sample station was moved to Buttermilk Creek. Operational difficu~ties were not eliminated until this spring; however, tIle sampler is not operating continuously.

Data obtpined from these sa~ples will enable us to more carefully monitor and control releases of low level liquid effluents.

111~80 E}"'TENT OF EXISTI:\C AND PROPOSED PROCR10!S Tables 1, 2, 3 and 4 show present and proposed program for obtaining samples as follo~s:

Table 1 - Samples at point of release Table 2 - Samples Onsite Table 3 - Samples at Perimeter Table 4 - Samples Offsite The proposed increase in samples and specific analyses rcfle~t knOlm tellc1cn ... ies t<Jlvarc1 solubility,

. knOlm abund.:mce of radiol1ucliJes

~.

for anticip.Jted fuel coolinG time, and commercial availnbility of qual.ity analyses.

The NFS en"ironmental monitoring proBram regularly uscs input:

from independen t .::lIld coopera ti vc studies per formed a t this si te and work reported from other sites to continue to orient its program toward reelistic evaluation of the impact of this facility on health and well-being of persons living nearby.

Among the studies which have and I"ill continue to contribute very useful information, is the work done by:

Health.Research, Inc., Albany, New York, (ecological study)

..~:

Western New York Nuclear Research Center, Buffalo, New York, Environs monitoring)

U. S. Public lIealth Service, I-.'inchester, ~!.:lSS., (detailed liq-uid and gas effluent study and environs influence)

--- ------------~--

i . . . I I I'.  : i l; \' _ ' \ ..... 1" i .... I -II--~-': - .-

j ~ I I r_~

'101 I 1....-4 Q 0 In..... ° , .7

~

.... 1.-.,

(.',i ~'-,,,

I "'I I

1 ....

'0 ....

1.1. '~";:) :.: ** ..... 11 ......

t.~ I 0 c: 0 c:

............ j I :;

ocation So.nple 'Frequcnc v

,,- , .- ' 0 I I \ ..

c.:! 0:::

1:* .~

..,..4 I oM I.::: ,...... 0

~~ .~

0 1 I'/', 0

......:r.

. ~i i~! co i - ~ I c. . ~, . .:: . ; ; .~!,~ ,e;,.~ .. . ., .

0 '/.

• ' I .. ' I

, j_'!_'l int of Release I t-J-l tack Part,ides 1:;'-<1:-, continuous  ! Xl jJt:::l', iJ~Cl'~*~:e:* I i-! "

!C:lses I Cl'atinUO:1S 1'-/-'-1 I 1-j-l-1TJlJJJ-IJ))]-,-,';

1.. ]\.:;:1)', cOO1tinuous l-!-J-J !l IID_D_1LJJlJ agoon 3 \';eir  !':'atcr Il):dly I I I

,)1.\",:.:1)'

/::\_1_.1 ix! 0 IllllllJ 11 i' ""'"

II111II

i,,:1th Cl':::;'l'sitl'  :.:, Xi

~  :  : :

4 j(~l::lr. cO~~l'C'sitl' !_JJ __~_~_ ,_

1,\:111\;a1 rO::1Fositcl  ! I i II 1° 1 I I 0 I 10 10 10 1 01 1 01 0 1 °1 °1 i I

l-ri-'ll I I i I I '1 I Il iii "

I I i I Ill-11, i 1'1, Ili

- - - i - -I j, I I I I ii I i I I I

I I 1 I

I I r II I

- - - - ; j )-!~-!-U !I 1 I  ;-Il, I I I , j

= present progra~

= addi' to present prcgra~

___________________ 11 i ~ U:~

I .: - ' i i i ;' ..... , i- :

s'l:.",o 1.-< I i '\' I I c.1 i .

Ii-: I sl

';:. _ i

~"I' ._, :;' c:

(),

'.-, I I ... I I '.'

i

' : ; I.....

~::

' s.

.~

i::

I' 0

.~

C ......

0

'0.-<....

I

'I

':,\:.11

, ~

cation Sa~ple Frcquc!1cy

- , . . : c, I .-

I 1

I 1

".~I c:'

I -

I I .~

'J'. 0

r.

coo

'M ~~ .....,~ ~

0 'J".

Vl

{i ,~i : ; I ,-j I CJ ". ..... ...... ,,, ... *

~'I ' ; ~

I c~ ~~ f IF .? 1,0 .;-' .~

i ~ ;::~... v. .~ ~ .S1 ~I ~ _

I 12' 1-~]-< j-= r-t-'~i~-j~'- i*=-T~1-

.J . .

~ 1.:..."')  !~....,

I- .

. . 1l-~~--I=-.

\C'""""I ...; .....'! 1:11

,. . r~ -:-rr,-v'l~=

r(') I:'J ='  :: (; 1 "/<"'

-- - --j-i-'l-;-'- _1_ - '- - -i- ,

crceptor

_ _ _1

oon 2 I \*

ater QU:!L Co::-;'os:te

~:o:l::hly L~.l-j~t-I~J~L_l-l-~- -- -

1:\ J-I~TIJ~~-I_l-ll-,,_]_ J],-]_ J i-- I :I Ii-

'. I Ii. I I I I, I , .

c* i a 1 Lagoon I LIter x

S Farm

,tterrnilk Creek \\'2.tcr

,ant present program additlc present l'n>>);l":.!:n

To'..::: ... _'

---

' .. --; - .... :.. . , ......._." ......... ~ &.., t '" 'J

--I " ,-

- - - - - -------..:---'- _ _-_ ""4

,.---c-, .-~.

I

,~ i -"

i i ~ j i -,! I : I I .-. i j I I r-

- g: J ~ 1-' ~ I -; ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~.-. ~

I'

.. .~: (, I c c . c I II Ii I I .-. -'

ation S3;;Jplc Fre~ec:1cy I' ....

.J'. '- ':, .~ 'J) .~ 0

'JJ coo

.......  ! ..-l:,~

0 I :- : :- :

f, ....... 'f.

I

'1')

i I

': I I I I ~~::  :: '.' ';, CJ 'J 0 ~ -' " _.

I :'1 I' "

il IS ( l~( (~" I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ J.f-t-

,r- ":

I .:~ ~ ~ c ,:.

~

1  :-;, L 1 ;,: . U 1 U U U \..0 \..0 'J) ..... 0

,~ =--

-< " C- 1 wi 'J. ""1'::

S c) Vl ..... -,

jTiTi~

1+

meter

.es at north, e3st, ,

I 1

I

--1'!-I-IT1-~1

, . , r-j---,-L-I---]I' h---- 1

- I Jth sides (3) Particles FaUoet 1 h"kly, cor:t ir:eoes

~!o:lthly, "

1 ll-lTi

• I , 1 ,,-,--,J ",] I I_1=C]-l1ya1-1-; 1-;_11-1-'J-1. i-r Jt

taraugus Creek Pl~nts IJune, Scpte:-::l.)(!!:

I-J~j_L~1-IJ~. 101- ()

1 Silt .JU~ll'! , Sl'l'tc:,:~)er

,_-1 I

\':ater 1*:k 1 y ~ cc::,.~~cs i tc 1 I x, x I x ! x I I-l I 1 I I 1-:--1-"-,-;--

/ I :

I 1_.J-UJ~--UJ I I I I I i i '  :

i;"f':1thlY, ,\ -l_l-! I  ! ! x Ix

_ _ _-! _ _ _ IQu:1r., " I I I I I , ! 1 0 1 1 1 I I I! II 0

_ _ _ _- t -_ _ ~f,\n:l\I~:l, " 'l-i-I-rl-i-I--l~~ 010 ToiIJ+/-+/-J' IFish Flesh I,hne, Sell::e~1ber Il' HI~ I i I J I 0 l1 0 / III I J '

I II I I I i I 1-/-1' -1l t-~

I

! l---I-l  ;-t-i i i ,

r - - - - - + -- - 1_1J_l_,_! --' I 1

I I I I, I J I

---1------1---;1 i ! I i I Il ITl I I i

---

t-----+------21 !.-J iii i I I I J i~' I I I 1 i I I II I

---

~---~---___l, l_L_l~ I~ I I

, I 1 1 1 I

'I I'

! '-4-.  ! 1 I I

~ present program e additio prC~;l!:lt pror,ram

: i  :

I .... I I I I'

-' -' ~~I! ...... ,"~

I iii

.-< I

~

I I

. .

• _i1 --;: i

.-,::: I I::: I C;

".-<" 0 ':::

I ~ \.:: ! :;: ~! I ~ : ~ I; .~ ~ .:: g .S ~ ~ ~ ~ ...:: g

ation Sar.:;>lc . Frcq ue:-.cv ISi " I .- I I ::: ~ I .J'-

1 1

.,,:.- I I

,= '.' 'F; ,CJ CJ 'J)

I

'M' './) ......"

0 C ...

o'~ ....

~

".: 1-;.' I ..'-

~-

I , ,,::

I :-;.  :.-~

! "- 1'-

-. I. rJ

(--

II.... ....

-> ....

! ~

)...4

-.I t.~ *..,j 0

~')

!/';

c***

.~

1['.-1 fi <j-= t='~f-f=-i=--I=-I=-h -I~ ~:-

."j o...J I . '._ /

.- -- I:': ":' /, ~ '.J ,:) I0 I .:) Ui ,/"'\ IN:::: 1 ""'~:;.I i !Jt-

'I :-.... ("l .....":" ...::

c ~ ~ ~ "'

tcs in 16 COm?3SS

. . I c=crH-d-[cn===j!1-.t t'ccticns I*"' by Twl :::::::'d. "nl=H=ljJJ_[~ Ij= - -i-- J I ~ I- I nrby Farms iCorn lli:ll":cst ti:~c i! i  !-U-l I! Jill l~ JI f -_ _ -!I__ l'ot_ilto__  !'l:l!"'.'l'St ti~:c . JJ_!_I_:_! ' I -~__ I _ _: j_ . I

_----;!l.cttucc lE:l;'\'l.st ti~'~ . J_J_i_! i ! I ,l_IJ~Jl I 1 il l i 1 t-----i---+---------l l !_iJ_!_IJ I_I I_I III  ! 0 I r - - - - - + - - - - - i - - - - - + ! I i i I I Il I i _ I_I I I I I I II 1_1-; I I I i 1 l~ TIll ~

r - - - - + - - - + I - - - ] 1 iJ1111 I I ,-l 1 I.  ! I i I i I j I il I I I ,

I I I I .1_1_\ i i-I I I I I illitil ! :

r-- I Iliilll-ttH1111.1 J~ I T

!  ! i! I i I~. I I I I i Il-I-prcscnt progril:n addltior prCScllt pro~ram

111~85 U. S. Geological Surveys, ,\re.1 Office, (flol, in vlaters!led)

N. Y. Concerv:llion DC?:lrt~cnt, Albany, ~ew York (tilrouch local offices), (spC'ciCll s:1:"ples)

Eastr.:an Kod.:Jk, Rochester, ::e;.: York, (fallout and size dis-tribution)

Also, the re,!ctor op;::':1tor" have cooperated excellently to furnish dat:l \,'hich ;:lakes p0~'~;iblc suppleClentary confirmation of 131r . and J H.

l'!uch of the \,:ork done' by these groups h.:JS heen to test the cap~lcj ty of cCJII.ip!!1ent to mOlli tal' very 101,' concentrations of r.1dio-nuclides and to cst.:Jhlish the li;:litinr, r.:Jdio:111c]i,les I"hich result frola naLlIral intel'actions in the envi rons. Some of the rcse.1l"ch \*;ork sponsibiliL:; for rcco;:~:l!cncling C(':lCelltrilt;oll:: in the cnvirons, From their lllvalll:lble sttidies, :,F5 !I.!s been .:JbJe to direct its progr.1r.l to [0110\*,' L!:OS(, radioll\lcJ idcs ',"hich \dl1 indic.:Jtl' <In api1rC';lCh to applic<Jble li~j.ts, NFS will increase it surveillance prograCl to determine the less-li~iting radionucliJ~s Qlso present at detectabJe conccntrQlion.

This progra~ ~ill not only strengthen the <Jssurancc XFS and tile lIe<Jlth Agencies aJready htivc that current environ::lent<Jl levels <Jre in all cases co~plying ~ith pertinent regulations, but <Jlso tIle cx-p<Jnded prosril:n should furnish useful d<Jta to those I,ho reco~~cnd concentrations in the environs.

EVALD,\TIO:; OF EFf[CTS OF RADIOAC1 RELE,\S SD TO TllE E;;V IRO;'~'iENT The initial evalu~tion of effects of ra the direction of the ;c;:1n3gcr of Health and:

1cms arc sub;;;ittccl to the Plant Stl.i'e:.:y Cc:mni' appropriate KFS actin;l.

NFS h"s nlrcady con,pletecl several stuclic ation of potenticll. p.: tll'.*:ays .::or radioactivit)

,i/

of resul.ting e:':posurcs La people, the cOllcltI::

forth bcl n '1:

Sr-90 I;~ FISII Duri.ng 1969 the' foll.uiving clisl:h.:JrGcs fro Haters \}ere Cl.:lclc:

1969 ])j.scllar~ccl Activity CU1"i.CS Gras s:j..., 0.376 Grc,.:; s .0, 136.1.

Tritium 5930*

Sr-90 10.07 TIle average per cent of ~WC in Cattaraugu monthly co~?osite sa~ples was 19.7%.

The U. S. Public Eea1th Service conducted j';est Valley I'l.:lnt during 1969. Although their

111~B7 yet been issued, preliminary data taken during this period has been made available to NFS. TIle preliminary data closely confirms the NFS data for they found the [ollOl'iing percent of NPC in Cattar-augus Creek on June 17, 1969:

51'-90 15  %

Ru-l06 5  %

Tritium 1  %

Cs-137 .006%

It WIS cuncluuc:d that Sr-90, Ru-106 :lnd Tri.tiulll I,ere the sir.-

nificant r~ldlonl1c.lides in Catt~H'augus Creek. Tritium at this Jev-el is not believed to be a hilzard, and ruLlleniu!II, while it may be foulld in fj~;1I gut, docs not h:lve any 1*:e11 developed foocl path to man. This leaves Sr-90 ~lS the only significant: radionuclide ,lith a I'lell developed food path to n;;:m from Catt<:lraugus Creek.

Mr. A. E. Aikens, Jr., consultant to New York Atomic <:Ind Space Development Authority recently wilde a study of the potential resultant dose to the public from 51'-90 in fish based on 1968-1969 data. }~ch of the following data is condensed from his report.

lie concluded that "};o mel:1ber of the public I.;ould receive an exposure in excess of -the established nation<:ll guideline from the consumption of fish containing 51'-90 and caught in Cattaraugus Creek. The analysis also shows that only periodic confirmatory surveillance prescribed as Rall[;e I by the fRC is required."

111488 S tront ium-90 is pre [erent in11 y taken up by the fish bone, nnd is not concentrated in the flesh. OPu\L Report 3721 provides much data tnl:en over a 2 yenr period from £ish in the Clinch River ~ where Sr-90 concentrD.tions vnried from 1.7 to 51 pCi/liter. It was found th:lt ""hite cr.:tppic e:*;poscd to 4.3 rCi/liter 5r-90 contained 32 pCi Sr-90/[; of calciulll ill f1cs!1 and 40 pei/g Ca in bone. It

\.;as n1so indic:ltcd tllat edi.ble portions of fish contain from 0,1 to 0.3 St".:ltnS of calcilll:l per k~. and tll"t the \-Ih01e [j.sh cont.:lins

.1.bout 8 f, Cn per kg. Thus, it C.:ln he assumed that 1 kg. of fish contnins 7.7 g CD. ~n bone nlld 0.3 g C.:l in [les11.

The [ollm*.'illg tab Ie prcsen ts da ta obta inecl [rom Cn t ta J:;lUguS CJ:ec:k fish by the ;,e\,I York St;lte lIeD.1.th DCpD.J:t:111ent in 1969:

Loca tj 0,1 Creek Concc'ntrr,~ j on \*iho 1 c fi s11 CC'1ltcnt pCi/liteJ:

Butterl7lilk Creek 142 289 (TJ.:out) 1373 (StlckeJ.:)

Springville D.:ll:J 10 415 (Bu llhead)

Zoar Valley 306 (Sucker)

Houth 10 38 (Perch) 431 (Sheephead) 269 (Bullhead) 100 (Eu llhead) 68 (Shad) 87 (Smelt) 863 (Rockb.:J.ss)

III The following t~ble presents similar data obtained during 1968:

Location Creek Conccntr~tion ~101e Fish Content pei Sr-':J0/lit0r pCi Sr-':JO/kg.

Buttermilk Creek 104 22,000 (Snull Fish):~

Springville 38 1,144 (Sucker)

Frey Drid(~c 6 (es t.) 2,910 (S;,-'ll Fish)

Zoar V:tllcy 6 (es to) 3,080 (Sucker) 40 Bridr;e 6 (es t.) 165 (Sucker)

Rt. 343 l;ridgc 4 (es t. ) 185 (Sucker)

Houth 4 (cs t.) 435 (Suckcr) 642 (Cill"p) 310 (l;ass) 350 (Perch)

Houth 20-(est.) 536 (Sucker) 971 (Bass) 704 (C~rp) 706 (Bullhead) 789 (Coho Salmon)

• Qucs t~ona hIe - may be 0 ff by f ac tor of 10.

~ \..

r"

"::\

l< ~

~

~

~

~

~"' R)

'-l ~

X s,

-.t

~

-\-

"~

x 0 -l- ~{

~

"~

" -~

§?

~

0,;: ~ "

~

~ "

.......- ),

,~

~

~

p C)

Q)

()

10 S

~

Cl

\~

0 II)

~

o 0 t\4

~

'V Cl Cl ~

These data are plotted in Figure 1 showing Sr-90 in fish as rela ted to Sr-90 in \-.'a ter from \o1h taken. It is evident th3t tile data sprc~d quite w ignoring the extremely high results on small fish, relating pCi"Sr-90/kg. to pCi Sr-90/liter I,'ater. \

the 1969 average Sr-90 concentration in water from Departlllcr::t and the cuncentration during the hi[;hesl The Ne\o1 York Conservation Department Diode a activity on Cat~*.raugus Creel: during a 15 J;IY perio August, 1969. The major concel1tr.:Jtion of fishermen of tlIe creek \o1i th the number of J(!cre3sin~; sh3rpJ y The average d3ily catch \,'as estim.:Jted to be It, ounc.

The average fisherman 1~.:Jde 6 trips [ler year to the (

annual average catcll of 4 pounds (2 kg.) per year 1)(

has been assu:.1ed that 2 kg. per fishen~lan represent~,

posure to a representative sample of the popul.:Jtion.

There \-:as one outstanding fisheri:1an 1,110 st.:Jte e.:Jch day of the lSO-dny trout season. It has been a represents th~ highest exposure to any individual.

tha t he consumes 50% of his ca tch, or 3tl kg. per yea:

From the above data i t i s possible to estimate daily intake of Sr-90 by the average fisherman for tl concentrations; t\.'o yearly averages and the high quar

1]

It has been assumed that the fisherman consumes 2 kg. per year, flesh only in one case and flcsll plus 10% of the bone in the other. Data based on these assumptions are shown in the following table.

TABLE 5. Sr-90 Content of Fish from Cattaraugus Creek and Average Daily Int~ke of Sr-90.

Sr-90 Concelltration Daily In t[Jke'~

Sr-90 _ _~(p.Ci /kE,:_J_ _ (nei Sr-90)

\oJ:Jtcr Concentration ~';hol e Flet;h &

Condi t.i on ~Ci/l.) Fish Bone Flesh Flesh ]07, Bone 1969 Average (by NFS) 36 1110 1065 0.25 0.83 1969 Aver;]ge (by SlID) 44 1300 1250 50 0.31 0.38 1969 High Quarter (by NFS) 72 -2000 1920 80 0.44

• Assuming 2 kg. fish/year/person Following the same reasoning, the average daily intake of the ardent [isher.:Jan has been calculated assumin;:; he COnSll;;]eS 34 kg. per year of fisll taken from the 11igh quarterly concentration waters. It has been ilSSU!7lcJ tho.t he consuned 50% of his annual catch of about 68 kg per year and that the entire catch came from waters containing 72 pCi Sr-90 per liter. Again, the intake assumes flesll only and flesh plus 10% of the bones. The average daily up-take for this maxirnum exposure individual \,oull be 7.5 pCi/day fro;;] flesh only and 25 pCi/day fror;]

flesh 01 us 10;: bone s_

To recapitulate, tIle average daily int3ke [

man is about l~ pCi Sr-90'per day on the Iligll side Sr-90 per day would be more likely. The maximum e is abou t 25 pCi Sr- 90 per d.:1Y. These (1.:1 ily in t.:1kc 600 pCi/day whicll is equivalent to the FRC guideli:

per year to the bone marrOI" [or the maxirnlln indivi l equivalent to l70mr per year for tIle avcr3gc expos!

Thus, the avcra<,e l'XpOGUre is abo'..lt 0.5% of the :JpI limit ,.hile the maXilllUi:1 exposure to an individual j maxi6um [or an inJividual.

It shou]cJ also be noted that the averilge e:*:p lVithin the FTIC RanGe I of 0 to 20 pCi 5r-90 per d;!y the [ollol*,ing action [or nan~;e I:

RA!,(;E I-

"In takes f alli ng in to this ronge ',,'Ql under normal conditions be expected to rc any appreciable number of individuals in ulation reaching a l.::lrge fraction of tile T1lerefore, if calculations based upon a k of-the sources of release of radioactive to the enviroI1-':1ent indicate that intakes, population .::Ire in this range, the only aCi quircd is surveillance adequate to provid,

_1 ., _

Hith these 1m,' levels of exposure to an admi of the population; it c.:m be concluded that there i problem at the present levels of Sr-90 in Cattarau follOldng the removal of 90;; of the Sr-90 from tile hazard becomes entirely negligible.

CESIW! IN DEER Since a well defined population group may b food poth frol~l deer to man, the possible intake ()

meot has been investigated. Sr-90 is not a prob]

since it tends to COllcentrute in the bone ond not thus is not availabJ e for consu*mption.

Deer sar;lples Ilave been routinely taken on ~;)

State Conservation Departr.wnt and analyzed by the partment. The ')fghest Cs-137 content found to tId llCi Cs-137/1~g. of meal in a deer taken indde the

).967. Presu:;).1bly thi~; dec,r hdd been drinking fran the outfoll illld Hal, thus e:*;posed to tile' highest Cs It must be emphosi7.ed that this deer docs not rppr typic<ll levcls ovailablc to the deer hunter since mitted'oJithin the securi ty <lrea. ~,a!vdeer ,,'ere an:

1968 and 1969 which were taken on the site but out!

area. The highes t C5-137 concen l ra tion found '.*:a5 ~

of meat. TIle average cesium content found in 18 de this level. From these concentrations \O:e have post exposure, one the ma~:i~lu:n exposure to an individual the expected exposure to the average deer hunter.

For tIle maX1mum exposure to any individual it that the hunter takes the highest Cs-137 content dc.

and th,1.f- hc> rn!,c;.'1:'T"r.<.: rho r>.,...,t-.; .... ,...., 0(1 '1.~. _or -,--

fl1490 were to occur the hunter "auld receive l50"IR during the period the Cs-137 is retained in the body. TIle biological half-life for cesium in the human body is 70 days, so that the cesium would be essentially entirely elil1lin:1 ted 1,,1 thin 12 months. This exposure is 307. of the allOlvable exposure to an\' individu.Jl member of the population of 5001;IR per year.

For the more common s i tua tion, it has been a5su::wd tha t the averil['.e hunter tilkc!; tIle hi;:hcst ce~.;ium content deer found outside the seclll-i ty fence; lh;] t he con!;UIIlCS SOl.: of the 80 Ihs. of dressed 3

meat containing J. 3:.;10- (I Ci Cs-137 /1:[',s. Thi s annual consulilption by the average hunter is believed to be con5erv~lti.vC. The aver:Jp,e daily

-I, uptake of Cs-137 I,ould be- 2:-:10. /-( Ci C5-137 per day ,,'hieh is equiv;Jlcnt to 50% of the fl\C guideline for Range I (0 to 360 pei C5-137 /day).

This 1m" level of c~:posure rcqiJ1rcs *only "Surveillance ade'luate to pro- -

vide reasonable confirmation of ea1eu1.:1tion" according to th" n{C second report.

It should be noted that these exposures I,'ere predicated upon existing levels of conta~ination and tIlat ~hen 902 of Cs-137 has been re;~oved [ro::1 the effluents the biological hazard from cesium \ViII be negligibl~. Asswning a straight line relation bet~een releaseR and cesium concentration in deer, the maximu~ individual ~ould receive 15mR/ye.:1r or lO~ of the allo~able exposure to tIle general population.

This is equivalent to 30% of Range I intake of cesium. TIle average hunter intake 0:' Co;-137 ,:culd be 51: of 1-:.1:1(;(; I of the fRC guidc-lines_

1116:;0 UNITED STAres RE:C£iV~E=-'D--~

ATOMIC ENEr.;:CY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C 1.0 'j4 'j DEC 22 1971 R.. N. Nil' ,

DEC 20 1971 Nr. J~obert N. Hi1.1er, President Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 600 Rockville., N;n:yland 20852

Dear Nr. Hiller:

This refers to your letter of October 13, 1971, in Hhich you requested a hearing to consider the requirements of Technical Specification Change No.* 15 to Provisional Operating License No. CSf-l.

In vieh' of progress made to clate and the effort being made by NFS to improve the per[(.rmancC'. of tlJ(~ lOI;-level ,mstc treatment plant, as evi-denced in discussions with tIle staff pursuant to your request for a hearing and tIl(> substantial program and schedule of I*}ork described in the NFS submittals of December 1, 1971 and December 8, 1971, He have deferred the cffective elate of r:hange 15 as set forth belol" and have established the [olloh'in1; interim requirements:

1. NFS shall actively pursue the program outlined in the NfS submittals of December 1,1971 and December 8,1971, toward the objective of meeting the limits specified in deferred Change 15.

2. l~fS shall submit the reports discussed in our letter to you. which authorized Technical Specification Change No. 16.

3. NFS and tlJd.r consult,lI1ts shall meet Hith the Commission staff and their consultants Hhanever we deem it necessary to discuss progress made in improving the management of 10H-level ,,'astes.

4. NfS, pending cC'mpletion of the 1mv-1evel Haste treatment improvement program and the adoption or modification of Change No. 15, shall mini-mize effluent releases to the environs and, in any case, limit releases such that:

a. The concentration of Cs-137 in the liquid Haste at the point of release from the lagoon system "ill not exceed 2 x 10-5 )lCi/ml.

b. TIle concentration of radioactivity in the Cattaraugus Creek will not ~~ceed either;

i. Ten percent (102) of the prorated concentrations listed in AppcndL~ n, Table II, 10 CFR Part 20 averaged over any quarterly period; or

• CEC ;3 0 197\

• 11165'1

.~. Robert N. ~:iller ii. ~,'enty percent (20:;;) of t11e prorated concentrations listed in Api'cndi."{ R, Table II, 10 CFR 20 for any "eekly composite sample taken in accordance ,*:ith Technical Specification 5.1.1.

e. If the radioactive concentrations exceed either a. or b. above, then NFS shall:

i. Take such acti.on as is necessary to come into prompt com-pliance.

ii. Hake an invesL.l:-:ntLon to identify the C;1l1se or causes for such levels of r;,cJ loac tivity.

iii. Define and ini.tLnte a progrillll of action to reduce such levels, and iv. Repor t these ac tions to the Commission on a timely basis.

We have uetermincc] th.~t t11c~;e interim rC'quirements do not present sig-nificant hazard con" :deraUol1s 1I0t described or implicit in the NFS Final Safety Analysis l~l'port, anel t11:1t there is reasonable assurance tklt the health and safely or the public \*,ill not he endangered.

Please inform liS by letter il t an early cla te. of your agreement to the fore-going. Pending further notice, it is hereby ordered that Chilnr:e 15 pre-viously issued sllal1, in nc:cord:tnce ",j til 10 CFR 2. 20!., become ef [ective July 1, 1972.

FOR 'TIiE ATOllIC ENERGY Co:r:-1ISSION t1J.fJ~'r

s. H. Smil~y, Direc tor Division of K,terials Licensing cc: }~. James Cline

CHANGE NO. 17

(" r (( 50.!201 N F S NUCLEA~ fUEL SE~vICEs.INc. -.

sox 12-4 ---WEST VAL.~E!~qfl~.t.

AAEA COOE 71e TELE ...... ONE 842-32315 March 6. 1972 Seymour H. Smiley, Director Division of Materials Licensing U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C. 20545

Dear Mr. Smiley:

Pursuant to Paragraph 50.59 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. hereby requests Change No. 17 to the Technical SpeCifications of Provisional Operating License CSF-l.

The proposed change to Specification 3.3, Calibration. Laboratory Stan-dard and Test Materials would authorize the quantities of radioisotopes

\ necessary for the West Valley Laboratories to support the development of the Lpw Level Waste Treatment Plant and the expansion of its environ-mental monitoring program. The addition to the authorized inventory of radionuclides will not involve any significant change in safety measures presently required. -'

We do not believe that the proposed changes present any significant I

hazard consideration not described or implicit in the NFS Final Safety Analysis Report submitted under Docket 50-201; therefore. authorization of the changes is requested.

/

Very truly yours.

()~II--~

~ '. P. Duckworth .

P~nt Manager JPD:ps Attachment cc: D. H. Shafer E. D. North

UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. aoua April 12. 1972 COpy Docket No. 50-201

/

Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. P. ~ckworth Plant Manager Box 124 West Valley. New York 14171 And New York Atomic and Space Development Authori~

ATTN: Mr. James Cline General Manager 230 Park Avenue Change No. 17 New York. New York 10017 License No. CSF-l Gentl ernen:

This refers to your request dated March 6, 1972. for Change No. 17 to Technical Specifications of Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l.

The proposed change to Specification 3.3. c6libration, laborato~ standard, and test material requested authorization to change the quantities of radioisotopes necessa~ for the West Valley laboratories to support the development of the low-level waste treatment plant and the expansion of its envirorvnental monitoring program.

We have reviewed the information from Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc. and have determined that the change in the Technical Specification designated as Change No. 17 and set forth on enclosed page 8 does not present sig-nificant hazard consideration not described or impl,cit in the NFS Final Safety Analysis Report. and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.

A copy of the Safe~ Evaluation by the Division of Materials Licensing relating to Change No. 17 is enclosed.

COR.Y

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc., and COp-y New York Atomic and Space Development Authority Accordingly, pursuant to Section 50.59 of 10 CFR 50, the change in Technical Specification 3.3 of Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l is authorized.

FOR THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION S. H. Smiley, Director Division of Materials Licensing

Enclosures:

1. Revised page 8

2. Safety Evaluation COp-y

-'6 -

.tateria1 Possession Limit

-Form Plutonium 62. grams any Plutonium 14. grams a.a1ed .ource P1utunium-242 6. grams any P1utonium-238 1. Iram any Nuptunium-237 3.5 x 10- 3 curie any Americium-241 1.0 x 10- 3 curie any 1'hallium-204 5. x 10-6 curie any Cesium-137 s. x 10-a- curie any Cesium-137 33. curies aea1ed aources Cesium-134 s. x 10- 3 curie any Cerium-144 1. x 10-2 curie any Iodine-131 6. x 10-6 curie any Iociine-129 s. x 10-6 curie any Ruthenium-106 1. x 10- 2 curie any Zirconiuu.-95

• s. x 10-2 curie any Strontium-90 1. x 10-2 curie any Strontium-85 1. x 10-2 curie any Krypton-85 3. curies any Zinc-65 1. x 10-2 curie any r.nh ... 1t-60 Cobalt-58 s.

1.

..x ...10-v 1n-2 2

c**-~

curie

...y any Manganese-54 s. x 10- 3 curie any Antimony s.* x 10- 3 curie any Any byproduct material with atomic numbers 3. x 10-6 curie any from 3 to' 85 inclusive . .ch

.~

(Change No.17)

SAFETY EVALUATION Bt THE DIVISlnR OF MATERIALS LIr.ENSINC NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC.

DOCUT XO. 50-201 LABORATORY STANDARDS AND TEST MATERIALS By letter dat.d March 6, 1972, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. requested a change in technical Soecification 3.3 of License Mo. CSF-1 to increase the quantities of ' radioisotopes necessary for the West Valley labora-tories to support the d.vel~ment of the low-level waste treatment plant and the .~ansion of its environ.ental monitorin~ pro~ram.

Technical Specification 3.3, Calibration, Laboratory Standard, and Testin~ Materials lists the radionuclides which maybe received, processed, stored, and us.d for standards, tests, measurements, and calibration.

Tne attached table indicates the chan~es in quantities reQuested by "75.

The table also shows the additional radionuclide. for which NFS requested authorization.

The changes in possession limits orooosed for laboratory ~UrDoses will not increase the hazard fro. an accidental release of radioactivity from the facility. Limits presently in effect which ~overn the routine releases of radioactivity in effluents from the facility provide adequate protection of the public fro. the radionuclides listed.

A~oroval of the attached Chan~e No. 17 to the Technical S~ecification of Licens. No. eSF-l is recommended.

Sipedt /.:/(?" *"/6L~

C. W. Nilsen Irradiated Fuel~ Branch Division of ~aterials Licensing

.\p1Jrovecll ~

R. B. Chitwood, Chief Irradiated Fuels Branch Dlvf.o;fon c'! ~'3tet't~l-;

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE DIRECTORATE OF LICENSING i~;

FUELS AND MATERIALS NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC - DOCKET NO. 50-201 CHANGE NUMBER 18 TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

~y letter dated July 19, 1972, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

requested changes to the Technical Sp~cifications of License No. CSF-l. The changes requested included:

1. Modification of existing specifications 1.0-1.4, 2.0, 3.1.3, 4.7, 4.9, 4.12, 4.13, 4.15, 5.2, 6.2, 6.6, and 6.7.

2. Replacement of existing specifications 7.2, 7.3, and 7.4, with new specifications 4.16, 5.5, and 5.6 respectively.

3. Incorporation of existing specification 4.0, 5.0, 6.0, and 7.0 into a new specification number 0.0.

4. Renumbering existing specification 7.5 to 7.2.

5. Addition of a new specification 6.11, Solvent Analysis.

These changes have been designated Change no. l8~

The changes requested constitute a general updating and modif~cation of the Technical Specifications to reflect plant modifications and operational changes made on the basis of operating experience or, in some cases, to reflect changes in the technical basis used for the specifications.

Minor modifications such as corrections, minor word changes, etc., have been made to the changes as submitted by NFS. These modifications have not, however, affected the intent of any specifications.

Brief descriptions of all changes to be made to the existing Technical Specifications under Change 18 are given in the following pages. If a change could affect safety, the safety considerations are also discussed.

Based on our review, we have concluded that the changes do not present significant hazard considerations not described or implicit in the NFS "Final Safety Analysis Report" and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the changes.

Signed:

Approved:

DISCUSSION OF CHANGE NUMBER 18 TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS OF LICENSE CSF-1

0.0 INTRODUCTION

Thi~ new section has been added to de~ine Technical

\

Specifications and to explain the need and use of Specifi-cations.

The grouping of the Specifications into seven sections is also explained and the purpose of each group is briefly discussed.

Information contained in this Specification includes that formerly contained in 4.0,5.0,6.0 and 7.0 which were introductory paragraphs to groups of Technical Specifications.

1.0 PLANT DESCRIPTION The plant description has been rewritten to eliminate unnecessary details and to make the description correspond to actual plant design and operation.

2.0 DEFINITIONS The list of definitions has been revised to include only technical terms that are important to a full understanding of the Technical Specifications or that may be ambiguous.

\\

3.0 AUTHORIZED MATERIALS Spe~ification 3.1.3 has been modified ~o require that a criticality analysis of the new dissolver be made by NFS and approved by the Commission before ~uels containing more than 10~ U-235 could be processed. Previous submissions by NFS (letters dated April 18 and September 22, 1969) have de-scribed the nuclear safety of the dissolver for fuels enriched below 10% U-235, and have been reviewed and approved by the Commission.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 139

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 140

4.12 CAUSTIC CONCENTRATION IN CARBON STEEL WASTE STORAGE TANKS This Specification has been rewritten to make it clear that the caustic concentration requirements apply to carbon steel and not to stainless steel waste storage tanks.'The requirements and limits for excess caustic remain unchanged *

• 4.13 SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE BURIAL A new Section 4.13.4 has been added to prevent future burial of fuel elements. Minor changes in other parts of the Specification have been made for clarity.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 143

4.16 RESPIRATORY PROTECTION EQUIPMENT This Specification, formerly 7.2, has \been rewritten

. \

primarily to set clearer use limits for respiratory pro-tection equipment. Specificatinn 4.16.1 limits the use of full face respirators to concentrations expected to be less than 100 times the limits in Table 1, Appendix B, 10 CFR 20; i.e., the "40-hour" concentration limit for workers in restricted areas. Specification 4.16.2 limits the use of self contained or supplied air apparatus to concentrations expected to be less than 10,000 times the "40-hour" limit. These limits reflect protection factors contained in the proposed revision of 10 CFR 20.

Requirements for decontamination of respiratory equip-ment prior to reuse have been rewritten to reflect plant practices and to express contamination levels in terms used'in the plant. These requirements are given in Specifi-cations 4.16.4.

Other conditions of Specification 4.16 remain unchanged.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 145

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 146

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 147

- i4 -

5.5 HIGH RADIATION AREA ACCESS, The'Specification, formerly 7.3, has b\aen changed from an "Administrative" to a "Minimum Condition for Operation" specification. A new portion, 5.5.2, recognizes the need for rope barriers and warning signs in temporary high radiation areas which cannot or, for safety reasons, should not be locked.

5.6 CONTAMINATION CONTROL Specification 5.6.1 sets limits on allowable smearable contamination or radiation in routine entry areas, provides for prompt reduction of excessive contamination or radiation found to be present and requires, if the excessive con-tamination or radiation cannot be reduced in seven days, that (a) operation requiring access to the area be discontinued until the source of the excessive contamination or radiation is identified and controlled and contamination and radiatiori levels are reduced to the~tated levels. (b) that Regulatory Operations be notified. These are the main provisions for contamination and radiation control contained in the former Specification 7.4.

Specification 5.6.2 lists areas to be exempt from the provisions of 5.6.1. These areas are freqently contaminated above 5.6.1 levels becuase of the nature of the work done in the areas or the nature of the processes used. Workers in these areas follow special work procedures and wear respiratory protection appropriate for the contamination level.

Specification 5.6.3 sets acceptable levels of contamination for areas of the fuel receipt and storage area which are fre-quently used, which may become heavily contaminated during operations but which can be decontaminated once operations have finished.

- l5a -

Some relatively minor requirements of1lhe former 7.2 Specification such as provisions for routine surveys by

\

operations and Health and safety personnel, marking and roping off of contamination area, etc., have been included in the bases for Specification 5.6, rather than in the Specification proper.

6.2 SUMP ALARMS AND EDUCTORS Specification 6.2.1 has been changed only to require that repairs be made to any failed alarm or eductor "as soon as practical" in addition to the previous require-ment that repairs be made before the start of the next campaign after detection of the failure.

6.6 DISSOLVER DILUTION AIR

\

Thi& Specification has been modified t~ require that

\

the air flow during dissolution of zirconium alloy fuels be sufficient to reduce the hydrogen concentration in the off-gas to two volume percent (SO percent of the lower explosive limit) rather than to "below its lower explosive limit" as previously required.

6.7 BORIC ACID Specification 6.7.1 has been rewritten to require not only a minimum concentration of boric acid in the poison solution but also to require that a minimum volume of the solution be available for use.

Specification 6.7.2 has been added to require an operating test of the system for transferring poison solution to the dissolvers prior to the start of each campaign.

6,11 SO~VENT ANALYSIS Specification 6.11 is a new specification designed to assure through periodic analysis that the concentration of tributyl phosphate in solvent used for extraction system is no higher than permitted by Specification 4.7.

7.0 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS Former Technical Specification 7.2 has been rewritten and changed to Specification 4.16. Former Specification 7.3 has been rewritten and changed to Specification 5.5.

The former Specification 7.4 has been eliminated, but pro-visions for control of contamination and radiation have been incorporated ~n Specification 5.6. Former Specification 7.5 has been renumbered to 7.2.

CHANGE NO. 18 COPY December 22. 1972 Docket No. 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark. Manager Environmental Protection and Licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard. Suite 600 Rockville. Maryland 20852 and New York Atomic and Space Development Authority ATTN: Mr. James Cline General Manager 230 Park Avenue New York. New York 10017 Change No. 18 License No. CSF-l Gentlemen:

This refers to the NFS request dated July 19. 1972. for changes to the Technical Specifications of Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l.

The modifications requested constitute a general updating of speci-fications to reflect plant modifications and operational changes based on operating experience or to reflect changes in the bases of speci-fications. In addition. one new specification (6.11. Solvent Analysis) has been added. We have designated these changes as Change No. 18.

A few minor modifications to both new and old specifications were neces-sary for consistency. We have included these modifications in Change No. 18.

We have reviewed the information from Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc ** and have determined that the requested changes in Technical Specifications.

including Commission modifications. do not present~ignificant hazards considerations not described or implicit in the NFS Final Safety Analysis Report and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.

COp-y

coe.y Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. Dec 22, 1972 Therefore, pursuant to Section SO.59 of 10 CFR SO, changes to the Technical Specifications of Provisional Operating License CSF-l are authorized is shown in the following table and as set forth on the enclosed pages:

Technical Specifications Authorized Superseded by Change 18 Technical Specifications Specification Page Specification . Page Numer Numer NunDer Humer 0.0 1-2 1.0-1.4 1-2 1.0-1.4 3-4a 2.0 3-4 2.0 4b-4d 3.1.2-3.3 6-8 3.0 4c 4.0 11 3.1.2-3.3 6-9 4.0 11 4.7 28-29 4.7 28-29 4.9 33-34 4.9 33-34 4.12 40 4.12 40 4.13 41-42 4.13 41-42 4.15 42b 4.15 42b 4.16 42c-42d 5.0 43 5.0 43 5.2 47-51a 5.2 47.51 5.5 55a 6.0 56 coe.v

COP.Y Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc. December 22. 1972 Specification Page Specification Page Nulllber Nllllber Number Nwmer 5.6 55b-55c 6.0 56 6.2 59 6.2 59 6.6 64 6.6 64 6.7 65-65a 6.7 65 6.11 68c 7.0 69 7.0 69 7.2 73 7.2 73-74 7.3 75 7.4 FOR THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (Original signed by R. B. Chitwood)

R. B. Chitwood. Chief Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Directorate of Licensing COP...Y

APPF.l\DIX A NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES. INC.

A:~D NEt~ YORK STATE ATOHIC A.~D SPACE DE\'ELOPHElIT AtITnORITY IRRADIAl'ED NUCLEAR FUEL PROCESSIl\G PLAl\'T TECHNICAL SPECIFICATItt;S LICEI~SE CSF-l Table of Contents 1.0 PLANT DESCRIPTIO~ SmtlARY 1.1 Locntion of Site 1.2 Location of Plant 1.3 nO~'l of li.:ltcrial Through the Plant 1.4 Auxiliary Systems 2.0 DEFINITICT.'S 3.0 AUTllORIZ;:D HATERIALS 3.1 l;uclear Fuel 3.2 Unirradinted Source Materi.:lls 3.3 Calibration. Laboratory Standard and Test Hateria1 4.0 SAFETY LUtITS 4.1 Radioactivity Content of Released Gaseous Effluents 4.2 R;lclionctivity Cont~nt of r.~1C!:!5ed Li-.;:uid Ef£lcents 4.3 Storage Canister Loadins &ld Spacing 4.4 Dissolver Chnrcing 4.5 Feed Solution Concentration 4.6 Fissionable lsotope Concentration in,Solvent Extraction 4.7 Extractant ConcentrOition 4.8 Uranium Product Solution Storage 4.9 Pl\!~~:1i:,!" !o,~ E~chanse Operation 4.10 Plut;O.liu:.1 :iolution Storage

Table of Contents (continued) 4.11 Rework Solution Concentration 4.12 Caustic Concentration in Carbon Steel t*:as te Storage Tanks 4.13 Solid Radioactive Waste Burial 4.14 E,:haust Filter Differential Pressure 4.15 Evaporator Steam Pressure 4.16 Respiratory Protection Equipment 5.0 HINunm CONDITI~S FOR OPERATIOO 5.1 Effluent and Environmental Honitoring 5.2 Process Instrumentation 5.3 Ventilation 5.4 Spal'e Haste Storace Capacity .

5.5 High Radiation Area Access 5.6 Contamination and Radiation Control 6.0 SURVEILLANCE REQUIRE~lENTS 6.1 Boron Raschig Rings 6.2 SUr.lp Alartr.s and Eductors 6.3 t~aste Storage T.:mk Pan In5tru~1cntation 6.4 Emer~cncy Utility Equipment 6.5 Air Filtration Equipment 6.6 Dissolv:-r D.i.luCic:l Air 6.7 noric Acid 6.8 Blan::inc-OH and Locking-Out 6.9 Hater Activity Alarms 6.10 Poisoned Dissolver Baskets 6.11 Solvent Analysis 7.0 AD:m:tsTRATIVE REQUtREHENTS 7.1 Administrative Requirements 7.2 Category 10 Fuels Operating Procedures

- I -

0.0 INTRODUCTION

These Technical Specifications identify the significant design features, operating conditions and operating limitations which are considered important in providing reasonable assurance that the facility will be operated 'lithout undue hazllrd to the health and safety of either the public or plant personnel. The Technical Specifications have been grouped in seven sections whose purposes are described below.

A summary description of the processing facility is provided in Section 1.0 to aid the presentation of the Technical Specifica-tions. Details of the facility layout, plant desigll, process, equipment design, methods of protecting plant personnel, methods of protecting the puhlic and plant operation are presented in the Final Safety Analysis Report for the Nuclear Fuel Services Fuel Reprocessing Plant.

Technical terms which are commonly used at the proces!;ing plant but which may be anhiguous ur~ uc[lneJ iil :icctiQr. :!.C in cree::-

to clearly indicate the intent of the various Technical Specifications.

The types and quantities of source, special nuclear and byproduct material which can be safely stored and utilized at the plant are identified in Section 3.0. These nuclear materials include irradiated fuel~ unirradiated fuel for checkout or processing operations, calibration sources and laboratory standards.

The limits established in Scction 4.0 definc the bt'untlaries of safe opcration yet permit the flexibility essential to chcl:lical processing. The limits have been set above the values required by normal operation but well below the values at which an accident could occur or the public safety could be jeDpardized.

Unlike a nuclear reactor which is designed to operate in a critical region, a chemical. processing plant is designeu and operllted in such a way as to remain subcritical at all times. No single malfunctibn can lead to nuclear criticality. Secondllry controls are installed

. to provide compensation in the event of the f.:"iilure of :l pri~2r)'

control. In addition, administrative controls are imposed to further assure the s;lfe opcrlltion or the f:leility. ror these' reasons, if the specifications in Section 4.0. other than those {or gaseous effluents are exceeded, 8hutdo~n is not mandatory. If such an (Change ~:o. 18)

occasion arises. plant operations lMy continue in a "ready condition" until normal operations are restored; hot.rever, i f during this period there is any occurrence that would further reduce the margin of safety.

an immediate shutdown is required. If the specifications for gaseous effluents are exceeded, processing operations will be shut down and immediate corrective action will be taken.

The specifications included in Section S.O set forth minimum con-ditions for safe plant operation. If specifications for monitoring gaseous and liquid effluents cannot be fulfilled, the operations which could cause a release of radioactive effluents t!:ust be shut down. with the exception of the main ventilation system which would normally remain in operation. Other specifications in Section 5.0 indicate primary and alternate conditions which may be fulfilled. If the alternate condition is in use the operations shall be considered to be continuing in a "ready condition." If neither primary nor alternate conditions for a particular operation can be fulfilled, the operations.shall be shut down with the exception of the waste tank off-b~= =y=tem. ~hich :ust be in operation ~hilp .pprnpriate repairs are made.

The specifications listed in Section 6.0 require inspections of certain equipr.;cnt or s)"stecs \..i1ich. with one exception, are not primary safe-guards but which are desirable for a defense in depth if a pri.mary safeguard fails. The lone exce~tion is Specification 6.1.1 requirin~

surveillance of the boron glass Raschig rings which are a primary safeguard in the high enriched uranium product storaGe tanks and the off-specification plutonium product storage tank. Surveillance re-quirements under SpeCification 6.1.1 confom to the proposed k~S stand.:lrd Lse ('If J)oro~i1ic:l!:e-Gln!':s RaschiG Rin~!; a~ A Fixed ::cutron Absorber in Solution of Fi~sile Hateri::!ls. The other specifications in this section focus attention on controls which, while not primary safeguards, are of sufficient importance thaS i~ediate and continuing action should be made toward returning the failed component to service.

If inspection required by Specification 6.2 throush 6.10 reveals the inoperability of ~ny of the specified equipcent. plant operation may continue under "ready condition."

Section 7.0 idc:1~if:'~,:; the ndninistrative requirements. Le **

organization, standllrd procedures and Teviews. etc *.* deemed necessary for safe operation.

(Change No. 18)

SECTION 1.0 PLANT DESCRIPTION (Chanse No. 18)

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 165

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 166

- 4b -

SECTION 2.0 DEFINITIONS

. (Change No. 18)

- 4c -

2.0 DEFINITIONS Definition Assembly A group of elements or subassemblies cOMbined in a structur.11 unit. The asser.bly is usu&llly tha t fuel structure which is removed from the reactor

• as an individual unit

• Area A portion of the plant which is described by physical boundaries for i~entification and communication purposes.

Blank-Off A removable barrier is inserted that prevents flow in a pipe..

Campaign The processing of a defined aMount of sirr~lar nuclear fuel under a specific Letter of Authorization and Run P13n \<lith a lI'.aterial Concentration Control A technique used to assure nuclear safety that limits the concentration of fissile isotopes in process and product solutions.

Favorable Geometry A geometry "t\ich is nuclearly safe for all credible concentrations of fissile material.

Fixed Neutron Absorber A tank or vessel eauipped with neutron absorbers that will not drain away, i.e., borosilicate glass Raschig rings ot: boron stainless steel Raschi?, rinf.~

Fissile Isotopes The fissile isotopes are uranium-233, uraniurn-235, plutonium-239, and p~utonium-24l.

Gross Count Total alpha, beta or ca~a radioactivity not classified according to specific isotope~

Locked-Out A control sHitch or valve handle is fixed in either the opened or closed position bv one or more padlocks or seals. The lock may be reTr.o\'ed only by the ori~inator or a supervisor of equal or higher authority.

,.  !: )

• ' ",,1 *

- 4d -

Definition MPC The maximum per~issible conc~ntration of radio-activity in air or water to \,'hich an individual may be exposed for a snecified period without exceeding regulatory limits for radiation protection

• Neutron Absorber A uaterial having a high probability for (Poison) capturing neutrons, e.g., boron and cadmium.

Ready Condition A temporary condition of operation usinr. pre-scribed alternate instrumentation and controls or additional alh:1inistrative 5afeguards while immediate action is being taken to restore normal operation.

Routine Entry Areas A plant area to Uhich entry is routinely scheduled for at least daily.

System An integrated series of eauipment and piping in -

Which a specific function or operation is carried out.

U-235 Equivalent A method of evaluating fis!'>i1e material on the Concentration same basis. The for~ulation is not applicable to systems that den end upon geometrical control.

U-235 equivalent concentration (gIl)

• 1.66 x Pu concentration (gIl) + 1.66 x U-233 concentration (gIl) + .1.00 x U-235 concentration (gIl). For this purpose, a~l plutoniu:n is considered fis-sile and the U-235 concentration is ass1.gncd ns that of the maxi~um pre-irradiation enrich~ent unless the isotopic concentrations arc determined by analyses. -

(Change No. 18)

- 4e -

SECTIon 3.0 AUTHORIZED HATERIALS (Change No. 18)

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 171

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 172

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 173

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 174

SECTION 4.0 SAFETY LnnTS

. (Change No. 18)

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 176

Requirements for analysis of the solvent phase for TBP content are given in technical specification 6.11.

The consequence of exceeding this specification is to reduce the margin of safety in preventing accidental criticality.

(Change No. 18)

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 178

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 179

4.12 CAUSTIC CO!:C!:t~TRATJO:: IN CAREO~ STEEl. "lASTt STOr.AGE TANKS Applicability This specification applies to the concentration of caustic in the carbon steel W3$te storase tanks.

Objective To assure that the liquid waste in carbon steel waste storage tanks shall be maintained in alkaline condition at all times to prevent excessive corrosion of the tanks.

Specific~ .

4.12.1 EXCESS CAUSTIC (BASED ON TilE STOIClllO:'~ETRIC M!OUNT REQUIRED TO NEUTRALlZI: ACIDIC t~AS1'E) IN THE CARnON STEEL HIGH LEVEL WASTE STORAGE TA:;KS SHALL BE PRESENT IN CONCENTP.ATlON OF (A) AT LEAST 10:1: BASED ON TllE ' ...ASTE VOLtr.-1E INTRODUCED THEREIN UNTIL THE TOTAL \'OLlr.-m OF n~TnODUCl:."'D '~ASTE EXCm:oS 10,000 GALLO;~S. (B) AT LEIIST 54 ON 1'llE SAl-:~ lSlI.~lS llK.i:JL 'm!:; TOTAL VOLtmE OF UrrnODUCED HAS1'!: EXCEEDS 100.000 GALLO~~S Ah1>

(C) AT Lf:.AST 1% ON THE S/~'iE EASIS AFTER THE VOLUHE OF IIITRO-DUCED \'!ASTE E..'\CEEDS 100,000 GALLONS.

Basis The carbon steel high level waste storage tanks are not suitable, from a corrosion viewpoint, for storage of acidic wastes. To prevent intro~

duction of acidic wastes, the normally acidic wastes are neutralized prior to transfer into the storage tank. As an additional safety precaution, the solution in the storage *tank '~ill al\-!3ys contain excess caustic so that inadvertent addition of unneutralized waste would not result in accelerated tank corrosion.

(C~.:.*.~' .'.. \,.'.

4.13 S()i..ID RADIOAI..TIVr:. l-?ASTE BURIAL Applicability This specification applies to the transfer and storage of solid radioactive waste material rel'lulting from the sepilrntion, in the reprocessing plant, of nuclear material from nuclear fuel. This specification also applies to the burial of cont~min3ted plant equipment if buried in the same area as separation waste.

Objective To assure that activity associated with buried waste does not migrate from the burial area.

Specification 4.13.1 SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE GENERATED BY THE OPERATIO~ OF THE PLANT SHAJ.L BE BURIJ:D CO::PI.ETELY 1-1lTU'IN SIL'fY TILL. BEFORE A t:E\Ol EXCAVATION IS USED, IT lnLL LE INSl'ECTL1l TO ASSURE TIll,T IT IS l:'UI.L"i l~ITjlli; 1'1!1:. :;u:n: TTJ.I. rOr';;.\TIO:i. llURI,\L SllALL BE RESTRICTED TO Tm: rLANT ARI:'\ DRAl!:f-I) tY QUARRY CREEK AIm ERD}!AN BROOK. HO m;I~I.',L or I!:*.STJ.: Si:*.l.;. j;:: :;:~/,!:;:R Tl:AN 100 FEtT TO TilE CREST OF TllS D:nu::.; m ::mc:! (~:::,"::~Y C~E::K IJm Er,J)}lAr~ BROOK FL01~. TIlE ~lwn!uH COVI:R or SILTY TILL OVER THE l~ASTE SIV\LL BE FOUR FEE'f AS l-fEASURED Do\~: FROH THE TOP OF THE U~~ISTURBED SILTY TILL STRATU}f. EROSION IN THE DEFILES, BETHEEN TUESE DI:FILES A~:D BURIAL AREAS AND or T!!E EAUiI COVER AFTER THE EXCAVATIONS IlA\'!: llEEN FlNALLY BACKFlLLED SHALL BE l1INI:*lIZED.

4.13.2 TilE LOCATION AT l';:'UCIl f,"\DIOACTl\lE SOUD t~'\STES ARE BURIED IN ACCORDANCE \vITH SPECIFICATION 4.13.1 SHALL DE r-1ARKED WITH CON-CRETE CAIRNS. A PLOT S1l0tm~G THE APPROXDII\TE LOCATION OF ALL WASTE BURIED SIII\LL BE tlAlt'TAINED ACCO:'IPANIED BY AN nmEX DESCRIBING THE GENERAL TYPES OF l~ASTE BURIF.D AT EACH LOCATION INCLUDING THE DATES OF BURIAL .u..'O CLOSURE. DUrLICATE RECOP.DS OF tURIALS SI~LL BE MAINTAINED IN SEPARATE LOCATIONS.

4.13.3 SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE TO BE BURIED SHALL BE PLACED IN l'ACKAGES lJlIICll PRLVE.tIT DISPERSION OF COl~TE:'..'TS ,\:,0 PREVJ::\T CO:~-

TAlUNATIm: OF HANDLERS. I~ A PACKAGt IS RUPTtmi.D miEN PLACED IN THE TRf.:JC!I, EARTH OVr.RFILL SHALL BE :r:*!:!I:DV.T!::I.Y PLACO O':ER THE RUPTURED PACKAGE.

(Change t~o. 18)

4.13.4 FUEL ELOIEN'l'S SliALL NOT BE BURIED.

Basis Nuclear Fuel Services ODerates t"10 .lste burinl arens at the West Valley site. One aren is {or plnnt generntt'd waste and is licensed under the regulations of the U. S. Ato:nic Enerr,y COC1r.lission. The other area is nrimarily for \~aste generated at facilities other th3n the processing plant and is licensed under the regulntions of the State of New York. This specification applies to the burial area subject to USAEC licensing and regulations.

As discussed in par:lgraphs 4.90, 7.14, 7.15, 7.16, and 7.17 of the Safety Annlys:f.s, the ion exch.lnge nnd permenbility dntn for the soil i,n t.lhich the r:ldioactive waste is to be buried indicate that the radioactivity ,,7f.ll be retained in theimmediDte vidnity of the source. Further, the low permeability of the silty till ,,,ill delay any possible seepage so that the longest lived ruthenium isotope, an element which h:ls relntively poor ion exch.ln!;C' properties ,,,ith the soil. would undpTp,n ncar ly co:::~lctc i:'.. ,lill"': l i va ciCC.1Y beiore it could traverse 100 feet of this soil to an adjacent water course.

Erosion of the stream defiles, the b.lnks betlleen the streaT:!S and the burial area and the burial area itself shall be minimized by grading, planting or liquid flow control.

Buried wastes are covered with four feet of silty till to provide shielding, to prevent water flow into the burial holes and, through ion-exchange act:f.on, to prcve=:t acti':ity from moving to the surface.

The provision of markers ane! reco:.-d5 of buri::l en st.:~,' (",'n,',i rro:,,,rt;'

serves to facilit.lte perpetual care .md precludes in3dvertent excava-tion of radio.lctive material. Records are maintained at the plant site and by the Ne,>' York StDte Atomic and Space Development Authority so that no Single accident or act of nature would destroy both sets of records.

(Change No. 18)

- 42b -

4.15 EVAPORATOR STEAff pnESSURE Apol1 cabili ty This specification.applies to the steam pressure which may be used in' process and* waste evaporators.

Objective To prevent rapid exothermic degradation reactions of organic materials tbat could be present in process or waste evaporators.

Specification 4.15.1 THE STEAr'l APPUF.D TO PROCESS lIND l~ASTE EVAPORATORS. OTHER THAN TilE }<*OLLOHING. FOR HF.ATn:G SOLUTIONS SHALL NOT BE ADHITTEC AT A PRESSURE EXCEEDING 25 PSIG.

EVAPORATOR GENERAL PURPOSE 7C-5 ACID Fr~\CTIO~ATOR rr.rn VAPORIZER 7£-1 ACID nv\CTIONATOR FEED RF.nOILER 7E-2 Basis "Red Oil" an organic phase C1ixture of uranyl nitrate. tributyl phos-phate. dibutyl phosphate. and other or~anic decOMposition products can be formed under certain conditions if orp,anic products are carried over into an evapora tor and allen*,ed to concentra te. "Red Oil" hi!s been found to be temperature sensitive and can explode at tenoeratures exceeding approxi~Ately 274°F. l~ile this material can be formed only under a series of unusual naloperations of the process, absolute pro-tection from the possibility of explosion is provided by limiting the pressure of the steam supplied to the evaporators to that correspond-ing to Ii temper3ture below 267°F *.

The General Purpose Evaporator, the Acid Fractionator Feed Vaporizer and the Acid Fractionator Feed Reboiler are excluded from the steam pressure limitation because feed stre3ms to these units do not COMe in contact witb organic solvents and therefore no "red oil" will forM in t~n u!'lits n~~ ~c* (\*.:n'C':)i(*:~ L::-::--:.'!'"1 ~~:i~ts.

The consequence of failing to meet the rC<1uirements or this specil i-cation is to reduce or remove the margin of safety provided to prevent a possible "red oil" t>.xplos~on.

(Change ::0. 18)

- 42c -

4.16 RESPIRATORY PROTECTION EQUIPHENT Applicabili ty This specification applies to protection of plant personnel from airborne concentrations of radioactive material excecdin:; the maxi-mum permissible concentrations given in 10 CFR 20 for restricted areas.

Objective To assure th:tt plant personnel, utilizing reRpiratory protection equipment, will not inhnle excessive qu:mtities of radi(l:tctive material.

Specification 4.16.1 FULL FACE RESPIRATORS APPROVED FOR RADIOACTIVE !-!ATEr..IALS UNDER BUREAU OF UINES SCHEDULE 2lD, SIL~LL BE USED ,*mEN THE CO~CENTRA TIO:~ OF AIRBOR1'E RADIOACTIVITY IN THE AREA TO BE OCCUPIED IS t;Xl'LC1'J-;lJ 1'U EX(;~I~J) TIlE CONCJ:I'iTHA'fIONS SlIo\,1l IN TAULE I, APPENDIX B OF 10 CFR 20, nUT 1S .EXPECT lID TO BE LESS TllAN 100 Tums SUCH CONCENTRATIONS.

4.16.2 SELF-CO::TAI::ED EREATIIlNG APPAP,I.TUS SATISFYIXG THE BUREAU OF HI:ms SCHED,;U:; 131:: n[Qurn:::~:::::"*:, 0': SIT!'), T::D Arr: P'l:SPl!~,\*;(lRS SATISFYmG TilE BUItE.AU OF In;;i:S SCIlEDl,;!.: l!iB SIi;\LL HE USED WHEN TilE CO;,CENTRATION OF AIRl-:OlWE R.\DIOACTIVITY IN TilE AREA TO BE OCCJJPIED IS EXPECTED TO EXCEED 100 TIHES, BUT IS EXPECTED TO BE LESS TIL\N 10,000 TlHES, THE CONCENTRATIO!~S SlIOt~~ IN TAULE I, APrr::;DI>: B or 10 crR 20.

4.16.3 PRIOR TO EACH ENTRY INTO A CO~~T~I1NATED ATIIOSPHERE, Il\DIVIDUALS

"'EARING R;:SPIRATO~Y Pr.OTECTIO:: Sl!.\l.I. CI:!':C!~ TilE ::/.Sl~S rOR FIT 4.16.4 FOLLOHlNG EACH USE, RESPIr*.:.-rORY rr:.OTECTIO~: }t\SKS SHALL BE RETUR!:ED FOR DECO~TMIINATIo!, U!'DER APPROVED HEAl.TH AND SAFETY PRocr:DunES. l:m::, TIll: CLi:,\~:n:G ,\::D REPAIR HAS Bi:r::, ArrRO\'F.D BY HEALTH AND SAFETY PERsm~U, l*tASKS SIL-\LL BE PAClU\GED INDIVI-DUALLY IN PLASTIC BAGS ~~ DELIVERED FOR REUSE WITH CLEAN CLOTllU:C SUPPLIES.

4.16.4.1 .fASKS SHALL NOT BE RELEASED FOR REUSE *IF FIXED r.ADIOACTIVE CONTAtuNATION EXCEEDS 100 Cr:i BETA/PROBE AREA OR 100 CPM (Change No. 18)

- 42d -

ALPHA/PROBE AREA ON SURFACES EXPOSED TO THE PERSON. OR SOO CPH BETA/PROBE AREA AND 100 Cr1-! ALPllA/P~OBE AREA ON EXTERNAL SUr~ACES NOT IN CONTACT WITH THE PERSON.

4.16.4.2 FILTER CANISTERS FOR. }-tASKS SHALL NOT BE RELEASrn IF RADIOACTIVE CONT~m~ATION D:CEEDS EITIIER 100 cpa ALPHA/PROBE AREA OR SOO BETA/PROBE AREA AT CONTACT.

Basis The Maximum Pernissible Concentrations OWC) shown in Table I Appendix B of 10 CFR 20 are the concentrations of airborne radioactivity that a worker could breathe throughout his forty hour work week and not inhale excessive rndioactivity. As a routine ~rocedure. NFS requires that if p~ant persoqpel may be exposed to such concentrations, no matter how short the,exposure time, appropriate respiratory protection must be worn. As additional protection, ~7S limits the use of filter masks to use in airborne concentrations which are expected to be less than 100 times the ~WC concentration even though the high efficiency filters used provide a protection factor of at least 100.

For use in airborne concentrations exceeding 100 times ~Irc (or a lower concentration identified in the MrS Health and Safety }Ianual). NFS requires the use of continuous flow supplied air equinment *~mich is approved by the Bureau of Mines, a recognized authority in respiratory protection. Additional protection is afforded by an in-line filter, which would be used during an emergency exit in the unlikely loss of supplied air.

The protection factors of 100 for filter masks and 10,000 for supplied air or self contained breathing apparatus correspond to those given in proposed Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 20.

• The contamination limits for reuse of masks and mask canisters are con-sistent with the limitations for uncontaminated plant areas (Zone II) and are expressed in radiation units used at the plant. Specifications 4.16.4.1 and 4.]6.4.2 are b~sed unon (1) a 207. countin& efficiency and SO cm 2 probe area for beta monitoring and (2) a SOl counting efficiency and 7S cm 2 probe area for alpha monitoring.

(Chanee No. 18)

SECTION 5.0 KINIMtnl CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION (Change No.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 187

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 188

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 189

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 190

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 191

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 192

- 55a -

5.5 HIGH P':JJ!,\TION AREA ACCESS AppliCAbility This specification applies to alternatives that may be uRed in lieu of the control devices specified in 10 CFR Part 20.203(c)(2).

Objective To assure that personnel do not inadvertently enter areas where the radiation exposure potential mny be significant.

Specif:!cation 5.5.1 LOCKED DOOR SIL\l.L BE USED TO COX"fROL AU:-II'l'TAl-:CE TO HIGH RADIATION AREAS UHERE AN llffiIVIDUAJ. HIGHT nJ:'CEIVE A nOSE IN EXCtSS OF 100 IULLIREH IN O;,E BOUn. POSSESSIONS OF KEYS TO THESE LOCKS SHALL BE LlllITED TO NFS SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL.

J.:;.2 IN l'L,,\!,~T .'.P-.EAR \*!'!!!CH C..Al*:~~(lT OR ~l~nTn.n ~nT DE LOC~{~~ A SYSTBI OF STANTIONS Cm:NECTI:n BY !tOl'ES IHTH "!lIGU n.... lnA'fJOr! AREA" SIGNS ATT/\CIIi:D SHALL liE USED TO OBSTRUCT Al.L ACCESSlllLE SInES OF A HIGH RADIATION AREA.

Basis 10 CFR 20.203 requires that a means be provided to ~arn personnel when they enter nrens where the radiation exposure potential ~3y be signifi-cant. n.:' nbo\'e procedures conform with the intent of 10 CFR 20. Some

~rc~s o~ tl!e plant such as staircases that nre necessary for evacuation PU1-poses have high radiation levels peri.Cldically. Since these areas cannot be readily locked nnd for safety reasons should not be locked the method described in this specification is used to alert personnel to high radiation areas so that they will not unintentionally enter these areas. -

(Change No. 18)

- 55b -

Appl icnbi lilY.

This specific:1tion npplies to the :1l1o\*1able *maxirr.u::l r:1di:1tion and removable cont:1mination limits for routine entry areas.

Objective To m:1intain adequnte radiolor.ical conditions for the protection of the health and safety of plant personnel.

Sped fication 5.6.1 IPJtESl'ECTIVE OF TIlE USE OF l'r.OTl:CTTVE CT.OT1II~:G, ~1An:TE:~AHCE OF CO:-;TA'n::ATED ZO:'~E BOll:m,\IUrs, ,\::D THE Al'PLICAT10:': OF EXIST-ING TECn:\l(~UCS I~ ACCO;;i)l'.:*:CJ: 'nTH PLAI,T 1'1~LlCEDURES, CO~;TA~!INA TIO~: AIm MDIATlO:~ LEVELS n; ROUTJ.!:E l':::TI~Y Al{[,\S SIL',LT. BE REDUCr.n TO flELO!,' 1"J1I: FOLJ.(lI*.'I):G J.F:\'CJ.S t;l1THlI: SCVJ:N DAYS AFTER nF.TF.CT 1():~ ,\::n TilE SOUJ:CE OF cm:TAm;;ATlnN OR l'.ADIA1'IC)'i SHALL BE lDE~:Tll'IED A}:D CO::iKULLF.:D.

RE!iOVABLE CO:':TA:HNATlO~

2 BETA, Dl'H/lOOcm 2

50,000 ALPHA, Dl'H/lOOcm 500 RADIATION HAJOR PORTION OF BODY. !ofREl'I/HR 100 IF TilE ABOVE RtDUCnm: IS Nrrr ,~CJ!T!':'.Tn I:: TEr. lT~r: GIVr:::,

(A) THE PI;OCESSI~;G Ol'r:l'.ATJ()I~ REOUIRU:C: ACCESS TO THE ,\'i.2.\

SIIALT. EE DISCOXTu:n;n l1::rTl. TilE Cm:1W!Jt,ATTO:: OR T:ADIATIO~

SOURCE IS TDE;nIFlED A.'-:D CO::TR(lLLr.D-,,~:n CO;;T.\~U~:ATI()N A::D RADIATIO;< 1.EVELS AT:E rrEDt.:ClJ) TO Br:LOl: THE AE,)VE LUHTS A!lD (B) rm tiSAEC DIRr:CTO~ATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS SHALL BE NOTIFIED ~nTHIN 48 HOURS.

5.6.2 sr:!!V1.C:: r,:~li;~;;: ~.\:~. ',,:; ::~: ~-.,: rrLJ... 1:EC~:~\*J::G :~:n ~';"-':".."\:!: :.~r:A, SCRAP RS':CVAL ROO:*!, EOT SHOP, HASTE nur.V.L AREA, CI~.. ? -Gi,S EL'J".,,[R ROO~I A!\D E~'TRACTION CHE:UCAL ROO: I (RECOVE!tEi) ACID ARE.-\).

(Chanr,e No. 18)

- S5c -

5.6.3 mll:::': lWRK n:vOJ.vn:G FrEt um.o.\nr:;r; OIt STOMGE OR CASK DECON-TAHINATIO~; IS i;OT n; PROGItESS J i'; THE rOLL(1;:1::-:; /,m:,\s OF TilE FUEl. RECEIvn:G AND Sl'OMGl:: AREA, DECO:;'l'tLUi,ATION SHALL BE STARTED \nTltW 12 1I0URS OF TliE Ei*:O OF l:ORK A!m THE AREAS SHALL BE Dr.CONTAHlNATED TO BJ:LOH THE FOI.Lmn:~c LEVELS:

l-WCTTiUH l'Ere-nSSTr.LE CO:ITA~*m;'\TTON tr:VEI.S AREA ALPHA. Dl'H/IOO bl2 BETA 01':1/100 CHI Service Bridges 500 50.000 Cask Decontamination Area SOO 500.000 Basis The level of removable contamination in routine work areas is determined at lcast daily by operations pcrsonnel. In addition, the areas are survaycd at least weekly by health :md safety pcrsonnel.

Thc lcvals of contDmination 81ven in S!,cciCication 5.6.1 reflect the removDbl(! conLa:.:il,:"tion It!'..?J~ w!lich if exceednd could C:luse the air-bornc rDdioDctivity to exc:eC!<l the lI!o:dmllll! pl"rlnis!-'iblc conc.;cutr:;.tions for 4Q-hoUT"s per wcak exposure. The lim.i.tll are b';:lsed 011 P]lItoni\ll1-239 311;1 Stro:1ti.um-90. The radiation level given distingu:f::;hes between high radiation areas (Specification 5.5) and other plant areas.

Plant areas named in Specification 5.6.2 are ~xpected from the specified limits because the operations and work performed in these areas result in localized le"\'e ls of cont:ll!linntioll or radiation in excess of the specified limits. Perl':onnel entcrin:; these areus \o~ear respirDtory pro-tection equipment appropriate for the contamination level and \Jork is done uncler authorized special procedures.

The pool service brid~e and cask decontnmination areas may become con-taminated above the limits given in 5.6.1 while \Olork is perfor~ed in the areas. The areas are separated from access areas by rope barriers and step-off pads. Personnel leaving the areas are required to survey themselves follo.:1111; recoval of the outer \>'ork clothing. The procedures are designed to prevellt the spread of contamination to other plant arcas. \~lcn n~t in use, the areas Dre to be decontaminated to the limits specificu in 5.6.1 to I"rc\'ent spread of airborne contamination.

'" program recognizes that contamination or radiation problems will The periodically occur through huTUlo or mechanical failure or because of t!11.: n':' *.*:*C (\f t'1~ I"';".('!,:". ; ":",,, to !"~ ....-;,T"4"("'!"r~t,d yet puts due er.:ph:!sis on

(. t 1 . ~ ...

- S6 -

SECTIOH 6.0 SURVEILLANCE REQUIREHE1nS (Change 1,0. 13)

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 197

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 198

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 199

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 200

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 201

- 69*-

AD~1Iln STM TIVE REQUIREI'IENTS (Change No. 18)

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 203

CHANGE NO. 19

• UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 10545 COpy Septanber 11. 1973 L:FFRB:EJF (50-201 )

Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc *

. ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark. Manager Envi ronmenta 1 Protection and Licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard Suite 600 Rockville. Maryland 20852 and New York Atomic and Space Development Author11;y ATTN: Mr. James Cline Genera 1 Manager 230 Park Avenue New York. New York 10017 Change No. 19 License No. CSF-l Gentlemen:

This refers to the NFS request dated July 3. 1973. for a change to Technical Specifications of Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l.

The proposed change to Specification 4.3 storage canister loading and spacing requests authorization to modify the storage configuration of fuel from Collll1Onweal th Edison Company I s Dresden I Reactor at the Fuel Receiving and Storage Area of the NFS Reprocessing Plant at West Valley. New York.

We have performed a nuclear safe1;y analysis ~n connection with our review of the information submitted by Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

and have determined that the change in the Technical Specification designated as Change No. 19 and set forth on enclosed pages 17 and 18 does not present a significant hazards', considerations not described or implicit in the NFS Final Safe1;y Analysis Report. and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safe1;y of the public will not be endangered.

COpy

• - - - - * - & --~ ~ __ """Jl .. '~:Jt"_-

Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc. and New York Atomic and Space Development Authori~ COpy A copy of the Safe~ Evaluation. by .the Fuels and Materials Branch.

Directorate of Licensing. relating to Change No. 19 is enclosed.

Accordingly. pursuant to Section 50.59 of Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations. Part 50. the change in Technical Specification 4.3 of Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l is authorized.

FOR THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

l. C. Rouse. Chief Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Branch Directorate of Licensing

Enclosures:

1. Pages 17 and 18

2. Copy of Safe~ Evaluation COpy

4.3 STORAGE CA;~ISTERLOADING AND SPACING Applicability this specification establishes l1m1ts governing fuel distribution in the Storage Pool.

Objective To assure that individual units and arrays of units are maintained in sub-critical configuration.

Specification 4.3.1 Ia.1W)IATED "1JCLEAR FUEL IN THE FUEL STORAGE POOL SHALL BE STORED IN CANISTERS.

4.3.2 '!'HE QUANTITY OF FUEL STORED IN A CAlUSTER SHALL BE L~*IITED SO TP.AT THE EITEC!IVE llEUTRO~ }ruLTlPLICATIO~~ FACTOR (keff) SHALL l~OT CCEED 0.85 BASED O:~ U:U!U'..AOL\TED FUEL. THE PRECISIO:; OF THE keff CALCULATIO~~ SP...\l;L

'R'F. r.ni~;'*1 , *. jj.:.; };\' ,\I'rLYI~:G nlE CALCULAIIO:-t.\L ~~!:-:'OD TO :a"O!-n~ CB.!T!:"!.'!" SYS'!!:*!3 OF SIl:I1.A!'. roEL a:.TERL\l..

4.3.3 IN LIEU OF DETErult:n~G THE keff OF A CANISTER LOADI.~G, A:;;Y SI!;GLE FUEL ASSE:*IBLY OR PACl~GE milCH HAS BEE~ STORED UlIDER l-lATER PRIOR TO SliIr:iE~"T HAY BE STOR!::D Il~ A CANISTER, PROVIDED THE GEO}IZTRY OF THE ASSE.mLY OR PACKAGE IS NOT R!...uuw~GED.

4.3.4 C.~USTERS SHALL BE SPACED TO PROVIDE A ~lIl'mllDI OF 12 IHCHES OF l:.;'TER BETWE~~ FUEL CO:ITAINED IN ADJACE~"T CANISTERS EXCEPT AS PROVIDED B?:LOl-l.

4.3.4.1 CA:<ISTERS CO:ITAI!:t:~G THREE OR LESS FUEL ASSEHBLIES FRO~'I THE DRESD~,-l R~\CTOR SHALL BE SPACED TO PROVIDE AT LEAST 7.25 INCHES OF WATER BETl-lEEN ADJACENT C,u:rSTERS.

4.3.4.2 THOSE CA:USTERS CO~ITAI.nNG BONUS SUPERHEATER FUELS SHALL BE SP;.CED to PROVIDE AT LEAST 8 INCEES OF HATER BEn*1EEN ADJACt~1T CA:USTErtS COXI*.u::I:'G SUPERHF-~IER FUEL .\.\'0 AT LEAST 12 I:'CHES OF l~ATER BETHEt.~ CA:USTERS CO:;4.\I:a~;G SUPERHEATER Ao'ID THOSE CA.'jISTERS CO~'TAli.::mG OIHER TYPES OF FUEL *

(Chanse No. 19)

- IS-lases

!he Fuel Receiving and Stora:e Area (FRS) has been designed to permit the handling of fuel n~semblies such that seonetry and administrative control prevents the interaction of one fuel ass~bly with another. Thesepre-cautions are necessary since the FRS will at most times contain fuel in excess of that necessary to result in a criticality i f placed in optil:lum array.

the storage racks and 'canisters provide a mtnimum edge to edge spacing of eight. inches between adjacent canisters and a miniauo edge to edge spaCing of tl1elve inches between the fuel contained in adjacent canisters. This

.eparation of tuelve inches of water prevents significant interaction of aeutrons and provides a safe array.

A keff less than 0.S5 provides a reasonable margin of safety to account for uncertainty in calculations and error in the identification of the fissile material content. By comparing the calculative method with knovn critical systems of similar fuel material, uncertainties in the method ac-= llLiulwl"t:u.

Individual fuel elements or packages previously stored under water have been demonstrated as safe and, therefore, no further calculations are deemed necessary provided that 12 inches is maintained between fuel in adjacent canisters in,storage.

Administrative procedures are established to assure correct canister loadings. The decreased water spacinas permitted for Dresden canned fuel and BO~~S superheater fuel have been shown to be nuclearly snfe 18 UFS letters to USAEC Division of }1aterials Licensing dated April 28.

1965. January 22. 1969. and July 3. 1973.

the consequence of exceeding this specification would be to decrease the margin of safety for the prevention of criticality. In Paragraphs 7.33, 7.34 and S.29 of the Safety"Analysis it has been assumed that despite all design efforts, a criticality incident someh~~ does occ~r.

the consequences of such an unlikely event have been analyzed and show that neither operating personnel nor the general public would be injured as a result.

The action to be taken to correct an exceeding of this specification is to tnke immediate steps to increase spacing of fuel in storage or decrease,canister loading.

(Chanse Uo. 19)

SAFETY EVALUA'IIO:l BY

!VEL FABRICATIOJ AND REPROCESSI~G ~:Cll DDECTOrtATE OF LICE~'SmG RUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC.

DOCKET NO. 50-201 STORAGE CAtiISTER LOADnIG AIm* SPAtUle By letter dated July 3, 1973, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. submitted an application requesting a change in Technical Specification 4.3 to permit codification of the storage configuration of fuel froc Commonuealth Edison Company's Dresden I Reactor at the Fuel aecovery and Storage Area of the liFS Reprocessing Plant at West Valley, New lark.

Technical Specification 4.3 Storage Canister Loading and Spacing establishes limits governing fuel distribution in the storage pool to assure that individual units and arra~s of units are maintained in a subcritical configuration. The application requests authoriza-tion to reduce the mihicum separative distance between fuel canisters containing up to three Dresden I Fuel .\ss~blies from 9.6 inches to

. 7.25 inches of water.

We have reviewed the inforcation submitted by the applicant and have compared it with our own independent analysis. Our analysis indicates that interaction between canisters even with the closer spacing will be

alight and that the proposed st~rage arrangement will be adequately

..fe with regard to nuclear criticality. A copy of the summary of the analysis (cemorandum Szempruch to Rouse, August 3, 1973) is attached., We conclude that amending the Technical Specification 4.3 to peFmit storage of Dresden I fuel'assemblies as described in the application will not present a significient hazards consideration and that there is reason£ble assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.

Approval of the attached Change :Lio. 19 to the Technical Specification of License No. CSF-l is recocmended.

Signed:

E. Jnreaerick Fu,l Fabrication and Reprocessing Branch Directorate of Licensing Approved:

L. C. Rouse, Chief Fuel Fabrication and 'r.eprocessing Branch Directorate of Licensing

'VcLot.l.e-r .rAl UNITED STATES . SO -:lOI ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. C.C. lOSes AUG. 3 1973 L. C. Rouse. Chief Fuel F,"bricati~~~~ r.eproc~~~ngo J Branch  ;,.;y;,:o~o_~CJ 0;: J/7J t'IIRU: 1(0 iii. 'cr..i.t:..~. C ief Technical Supporc Branch NUCLEAR CR!!IC:\LITY SAFETY REVIEt" OF :~S APPLICATIO:l DATED JULy 3. 1973 TO FJIDGCE c;.:aST!R S?ACl::G P.EQUIR.E:I:::TS ~ STORAGE POOl. DOCKET 50-201 This cemo~andum is written in response co your requesc for review of the criticality safety aspects of the subject application.

Using the calculated geo~etric buckling for a square array of four asse:::blies. the Keff ,~as found to be 0.90 for unclad rods at optimu:n

.aderation which cc~pares well with the applicant's values of 0.637 and 0.782 for two and three asse~bli~s per canister respectively.

Tne individual canis~ers loaded witn ~~ or three assemblies are well atui.n;I..i.&...i.~;.a.~. iULC=:l.d\.;.i..i.vu Le;:~,. . cc:u ~G(&.i.ei..cl.. DC:YCU* * '-C:~ 1" '7 .::;. ~ut:..r~c;.';

of vater is expected to be slight. A conservative interaction calcula-tion for tuo infinite slabs was used to verify this. Values of Keff of .81 and .94 were calculated for syste!:s of tliO infinite slabs of fuel asse~blies separated by 7.25 inches of water. Slab thicknesses of 4.27 and 6.40 inches representing loadings of two and three assechlies per canister were used.

~t is concluded that aeending the 2?plic2nt's license to permit storage of Dresden-! fuel assemblies as described in the application will not introduce any nuclear safety hazard not previously addressed in the rSAR for the NFS ReP:ocessin g Plant. ~~~'~ ~

A'L!~.,~~, . _L

/0 ,/

-It. V. Sz~pruch Technical Support Brnnch ec: W. A. Nixon 0'

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. 6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 600, Rockville, Maryland

• 208:

A Subsidiary of Getty Oil Company (301) 424-17 DOCKET NO. 50-201 July 19~ 1972 Mr. S. H. Smiley, Deputy Director Fuels and ~iateria1s Directorate of Licensing ~ .

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission ~'~;~",.--...- ~ ..

Washington, D. C. 20545 Dea r I1r. Smil ey:

-. During the last several years, NFS personnel and members of the Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Branch have reviewed the Tech-nical Specifications for the NFS Reprocess{ng Plant at 1,lest Valley, New York, with the goal of clarifying the specifications to facilitate

'both compl iance and inspection. These revie~/s have resulted in the approval of several changes.

- Based upon recent discussions and revie\'/s, Nuclear Fuel Ser-vices,Inc. hereby requests approval of the attached revisions to the Technical Specifications. We believe that the proposed changes do not involve any safety consideration not described or implicit in the Final Safety Analysis Reoort for the NFS Reprocessing Plant.

Very truly yours,

~~ J. R. ark, Manager Environmental Protection &Licensing JRC/kac Attachments cc: Hr. James G. Cline '.'

Ne\'1 York State Atomic and Space Development Authority New York, Ne\'1 York

0.0 DRAFT 0.0 INTRODUcrION These Technical Specifications identify the significant design features, operating conditions and operating limitations which are considered important in providing reasonable assurance that

,.the facility will be operated without undue hazard to the hedth and safety of either the public or plant personnel. The Technical Specifications have been grouped in seven sections whose purposes are described below.

A summary 'description of the processing facility is provided in Section 1.0 to aid the presentation of the Technical Specifications.

Details of the facility layout, plant design, process, equipw~nt design. methods of protecting plant personnel, m~thods of protectinz the public and plant operation are presented in the Final Safcty ,

Analysis Report for the Nuclear Fuel Services Fuel Reproc2ss!~g ,

Plant.

Technical terms which are commonly used at the processing plant but which may be ambiguous are defined in Section 2.0 in order to clearly indicate the intent of the various Technical Specifications.

The types and quanti tics of source, special nuclear and bypzoduct material which can be safely stored and utilized at the plant ara identified in Section 3.0. These nuclear materials include irradiated fuel. unirradiated fuel for checkout or processing operations, calibration sources and laboratory standards.

The limits established'in Section 4.0 define the boundaries of safe operation yet permit the ,flexibility essential to chemical processing. The limits have been set above the values required by normal operation but well below the values at which an accident could occur or the public safety could be jeopardized.

Unlike a nuclear reactor which is designed to operate in a critical region. a chemical processing plant is designed and operated in 8uch a way as to remain subcritical at all times. No single mal-function can lead to a critical incident. Secondary controlsara installed to provide compensation in the event of the failure of a primary control. In addition, administrative controls are imponel to further £ssure the safe operation of the facility. For these

.' reasons, if the specifications in Section 4.0, other than those for af.fluent8 are exceeded, shutdown is not mandatory. If such- an

0.0 occasion arises, plant operations may continue in a "ready condition" until normal operations are restored; however, if during this period there is any occurrence that would further

~educe the margin of safety, an immediate shutdown is required.

If the specifications for gaseous effluents or liquid effluents are exceeded, processing operations will be shut down and immediate corrective action will be taken.

The specifications included in Section 5.0 set forth minimum "conditions for safe plant operation. If specifications for monitoring gaseous and liquid effluents cannot be fulfilled, the operations which could cause a release of radioactive effluents mus t be shut down. wi th the exception of the main ventilation system which is normally operated until the problems are corrected. Other specifications in Section 5.0 indicate primary and alternate conditions which may be fulfilled. If the alternate condition is in use the operations shall be considered to .be continuing in a "ready condition." If neither primary nor alternate conditions for a particular operation can be .

fulfilled. the operations shall be shut down with the exception of the waste tank off-gas system, which must be in operation while appropriate repairs are made.

The specifications listed in Section 6.0 require inspections of certain equipment or systems which, with one exception. are not primary safeguards but which are desirable for a defense in .

depth i f a primary safeguard fails. The lone exception is Specification 6.1.1 requiring surveillance of the boron glass Raschig rings which are a primary safeguard in the high enriched uranium product storage tanks and the off-specification Dluto-onium product storage tank. Surveillance requirements under Specification 6.1.1 conform to the proposed ANS standard Use of Borosilicate-Glass Raschig Rings as a Fixed Neutron Absorber in Solution of Fissile Haterials. The other specifications in this section focus attention on controls which, while not primary safeguards, are of sufficient importance that immediate and con-tinuing action should be made toward returning the failed com-ponent to service. If inspect"ion required by Specification 6.2 through 6.10 reveals the inoperability of any of the specified equipment, plant operation may continue under "ready condition."

Section 7.0 identifies the administrative requirements, i.e.,

organization, standard procedures and reviews, etc., deemed necessary for safe operation.

1.1 "

1.1 LOCATION OF SITE The NFS Spent Fuel Processing Plant is located at the Wes tern New York Nuclear Service Center, a 3300-acre

'. si~e in the Town of Ashford in the north central section of Cattaraugus County (14 acres in Erie County). The

. boundaries of the site superimposed on a topocraphic

", map of'the area are shown in Figure 2.7a of the Safety Analysis. The plant is located near the center of the site on a mesa-like peninsula, bordered on the east by Erdman Brook and on the west by Quarry Creek. These two defiles are deep enough that, considering the water

.. ~:, table contours, any activi ty ge tting into the ground water in the plant site area will show up eventually in one of these two s~reams and nowhere else, except, of course, for that which is sorbed upon the soils and held' therein.

1.2 LOCATION OF TilE PLANT I

The plant is located near the center of the Service Center and is separately fenced with an a-foot high exclusion fence. The plant is about 1200 meters from the nearest site boundary. The process areas have been grouped together as much as possible to minimiza piping runs and to provide reasonable flow of material from the introduction of the fuel into the plant to the shipment of purified products.

1.3 FLOW OF HATERIAL TIIROUGlr TIlE PLANT Spent fuel assemblies are received in casks by rail or truck into the Fuel Receiving and Storage Area (FRS).

The'cask is placed into the cask unloading pool, the

'cover is removed and the assemblies are placed into storage canisters. These canisters are then transferred to the fuel storage pool for storage prior to further processing.

.....,-.~- ........--

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 216

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 217

2.0 MPC The maximum permissible concentration of radioactivity in air or water to which an individual may be exposed for a specified period without exceeding regulatory limits for radiation protection.

Neutron Absorber A material having a high probability for (Poison) capturing neutrons, e.g. boron and cadmium.

Ready Condition A temporary condition of operation using" prescribed alternate instrumentation and controls or additional administrative safeguards while immediate action io being

"" ."taken to restore normal operation.

"Routine Entry Areas A plant area to which entry is routinely scheduled for at least daily.

System An integrated series of equipment and pipir.g in which a specific function or operation is carried out.

U-235 Equivalent A method of evaluating fissile material on Concentration the same basis. The formulation is not applicable to systems that depend upon geometrical control. U-235 equivalent con-centration (g/l)

• 1.66 x Pu co"ncentration (g/l) + 1.66 x U-233 concentration (g/l) +

1.00 x U-235 concentration (g/l). For "this purpose all plutonium is considered fissile and the U-235 concentration is assigned as that of the maximum pre-irradiation enrichment unless the isotopic concentrations ara determined by analyses.

.-'- --,~--

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 219

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 220

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 221

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 222

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 223

4.12 j --

,4.12 CAUSTIC CONCENTRATION IN CARBON STEEL WASTE STORAGE TANKS

.i Applicab i11 ty

. This specification applies to the concentration of caustic in the carbon steel waste storage tanv~.

Objective To assure that the liquid waste in carbon steel waste storage tanl~

shall be maintained in alkaline condition at all times to prevent excessive corrosion of the tanks.

Specification 4.12.1 EXCESS CAUSTIC (BASED ON THE STOICHIOMETRIC AMOUNT REQUIRED TO NEUTRALIZE ACIDIC WASTE) IN TIlE CARBON STEEL HIGH LEVEL WASTE STORAGE TANKS SHALL BE PRESENT IN CONCENTRATION OF (A)

AT LEAST 10% BASED ON THE WASTE VOLUME INTRODUCED THEREIN

<*1 UNTIL TIlE TOTAL VOLU}!E OF INTRODUCED WASTE EXCEEDS 10,000 GALLONS, (B) AT LEAST 5% ON THE SAME BASIS UNTIL THE TOTAL VOLUME OF INTRODUCED WASTE EXCEEDS 100,000 GALLONS AND (C)

AT LEAST 1% ON THE SAME BASIS AFTER THE VOLUME OF INTRO-DUtED WASTE EXCEEDS 100,000 GALLONS.

Basis The carbon steel high level waste storage tanks are not suitable, from a corrosion Viewpoint, for storage of acidic wastes. To prevent intro~

duction of acidic wastes, the normally acidic wastes are neutralized

4.12 prior to transfer into the storage tank. As an additional safety precaution, the solution in the storage tank will always contain excess caustic so that inadvertent addition of unneutralized waste would not result in accelerated tank corrosion *

. ~,

4.13 4.13 SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE BURIAL Applicability This' specification applies to the transfer and storage of solid radioactive waste material resulting from the separation, in the reprocessing plant, of nuclear material from nuclear fuel. This specification also applies to the burial of contaminated plant equipment if buried in the same area as separation waste.

Objective To assure that activity associated with buried waste docs not migrate from the burial area.

Specification 4.13.1 SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE GENERATED BY TIlE OPERATION OF THE PLANT SHALL BE BURIED COMPLETELY WITHIN SILTY TILL. BEFORE A NEW EXCAVATION IS USED, IT WILL BE INSPECTED TO ASSURE THAT IT IS FULLY WITHIN THE SILTY TILL FORMATION. BURIAL SHALL BE RESTRICTED TO THE PLANT AREA DRAINED BY QUARRY CREEK AND ERDMAN BROOK. NO BURIAL OF WASTE SHALL BE NEARER THAN 100 FEET TO THE CREST OF THE DEFILES IN WHICH QUARRY CREEK AND ERDMAN BROOK FLOW. THE MINIMUM COVER OF SILTY TILL OVER THE WASTE SHALL BE FOUR FEET AS MEASURED OO\olN FROH THE TOP OF THE UNDISTURBED SILTY TILL STRATUM. EROSION IN THE DEFILES, BETWEEN THESE DEFILES A..'ID

..,. * ..oI....,J BURIAL AREAS AND OF THE EARTH) COVER AFTER THE EXCAVATIONS lIAVE BEEN FINALLY BACKFILLED SHALL BE MINlllIZED.

4.13.2 THE LOCATION AT \mICH RADIOACTIVE SOLID WASTES ARE BURIED IN ACCORDANCE HITH SPECIFICATION 4.13.1 SIlALL BE MARKED 'HTll CON-CRETE CAIRNS. A PLOT SHOWING THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ALL WASTE BURIED SIL\LL BE HAINTAINED ACCOMPANIED BY AN INDEX DESCRIBING THE GENERAL TYPES OF WASTE BURIED AT EACH LOCATION INCLUDING THE DATES OF BURIAL At'm CLOSURE. DUPLICATE RECORDS OF BURIALS SIL\LL BE MAINTAINED IN SEPARATE LOCATIONS.

4.13.3 SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE TO BE BURIED SHALL BE PLACED IN PACKAGES WHICH PREVENT DISPERSION OF CONTENTS AND PREVENT CON-TAHlNATION OF HANDLERS. IF A PACKAGE IS RUPTURED WHEN PLACED IN THE TRENCH, EARTH OVERFILL SHALL BE UMEDIATELY PLACED OVER THE RUPTURED PACKAGE.

4.13.4 FUEL ELEMENTS SHALL NOT BE BURIED.

Basis Nuclear Fuel Services operates two waste burial areas at the West Valley site. One area is _for plant generated waste and is licensed under the regulations of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. The other area is primarily for waste generated at facilities other than the processing plant and is licensed under the regulations of the State

of Ncw York. This specification applies to the burial area subject to USAEC licensing and regulations.

As discussed in paragraphs 4.90, 7.14, 7.15, 7.16, and 7.17 of the Safety Analysis, the ion exchange and permeability data for the soil in which the radioactive waste is to be buried indicate that the radioactivity will be retained in the immediate vicinity of the source. Further, the low permeability of the silty till will delay any possible seepage so that the longest lived ruthenium isotope, an element which has relatively poor ion exchange properties with the soil, would undergo nearly complete radioactive decay before it could traverse 100 feet of this soil to an adjacent water course.

Erosion of the stream defiles, the banks between the streams and the burial area and the burial area itself shall be minimized by grading, planting or liquid flow control.

Buried wastes are covered with four feet of silty till to provide shielding, to prevent water flow into the burial holes and, through ion-exchange action, to prevent activity from moving to the surface.

The provision of markers and records of burial on state owned property serves to facilitate perpetual care and precludes inadvertent excava-tion of radioactive material. Recorn~ are maintained at the plant site and by the New York State Atomic and Space Development Authority so that no single accident or act of nature would destroy both sets of records.

'\.

4.15 EVAPORATOR STE-II.H PRESSURE Applicability This specification applies to the steam pressure which may be used in process and waste evaporators.

Objective To prevent rapid exothermic degradation reactions of organic materials that could be present in process or waste evaporators.

Specification 4.15.1 TIlE STE.O\X APPLIED TO PROCESS AND WASTE EVAPORATORS, OTHER.

THAN THE FOLLOHING, FOR HEATING* SOLUTIONS SHALL NOT BE ADXITTED AT A PRESSURE EXCEEDING 25 PSIG.

EVAPORATOR IDENTIFICATION GENERAL PURPOSE 7C-5 ACID FRACTIONATOR FEED VAPORIZER 7E-l ACID FRACTIONATOR FEED REBOILER 7E-2 Basis "Red Oil" an* organic phase mixture of uranyl nitrate, tributyl phosphate, dibutyl phosphate, and other organic decomposition products can be formed under certain conditions if organic products are carried over into an evaporator and allowed to concentrate. "Red oil" has been found to be

temperature sensitive and car0explode at temperatures exceeding approxi-mately 274°F. mlile this material can be formed only under a series of unusual maloperations of the process, absolute protection from the pos-sibility of explosion is provided by limiting the pressure of the steam supplied to the evaporators to that corresponding to a temperature below 26rF.

nle General Purpose Evaporator, the Acid Fractionator Feed Vaporizer and the Acid Fractionator Feed Reboiler are excluded from the steam pressure limitation because feed streams to these units do not come in contact with organic solvents and th~refore no "red oil" will form in the units and no explosion. hazard exists.

The consequences of failing to meet the requirements of this specification is to reduce or remove the margin of safety provided to prevent a possible "red oil" explosion.

4 * .10 4.16 RESPIRATORY PROTECTION EQUIPMENT Applicability This specification applies to protection of plant personnel from airborne concentrations of radioactive material exceeding the maxi-mum permissible concentrations given in 10 CFR 20 for restricted areas.

Objective To assure that plant personnel, utilizing respiratory protection equipment, will not inhale excessive quantities of radioactive material.

Specification 4.16.1 FULL FACE RESPIRATORS APPROVED FOR RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS UNDER BUREAU OF MINES SCHEDULE 21B, SHALL BE USED WIlEN THE CONCENTRA-TION OF AIRBO~~E RADIOACTIVITY IN THE AREA TO BE OCCUPIED IS EXPECTED TO EXCEED THE CONCENTRATIONS SHOWN IN TABLE I, APPENDIX B OF 10 CFR 20, BUT IS EXPECTED TO BE LESS THAN 100 TUIES SUCH CONCENTRATIONS.

4.16.2 SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS SATISFYING THE BUREAU OF MINES SCHEDULE 13E REQUIREMENTS OR SUPPLIED AIR RESPIRATORS SATISFYING THE BUREAU OF MINES SCHEDULE 19B SHALL BE USED WHEN THE CONCENTRATION OF AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY IN THE AREA TO BE OCCUPIED IS EXPECTED TO EXCEED 100 TIMES, BUT IS EXPECTED

4.16 TO BE LESS THAN 10, 000 THlES, THE CONCENTRATIONS SHOWN IN TABLE I, APPENDIX B OF 10 CFR 20.

4.16.3 PRIOR TO EACH ENTRY INTO A CONTAMINATED ATXOSPIIERE, INDIVIDUALS WEARING RESPIRATORY PROTECTION SHALL CHECK TIlE MASKS FOR FIT AND LEAKAGE.

4.16.4 FOJ.LOIHNG EACH USE, RESPIRATORY PROTECTION MASKS SHALL BE RETUR.'I'ED FOR DECONTAMINATION UNDER APPROVED HEALTH AND SAFETY PROCEDURES. WIlEN THE CLEANING AND REPAIR HAS BEEN APPROVED BY HEALTH AND SAFETY PERSONNEL, MASKS SHALL BE PACKAGED INDIVI-DUALLY IN PLASTIC BAGS AND DELIVERED FOR REUSE WITIi CLEAN CLOTHING SUPPLIES.

4.16.4.1 MASKS SHALL NOT BE RELEASED FOR REUSE IF FIXED RADIOACTIVE CONTAHINATION EXCEEDS 100 CPH BETA/PROBE AREA OR 100 CPH ALPHA/PROBE AREA ON SURFACES EXPOSED TO THE PERSON, OR 500 CPM BETA/PROBE AREA AND 100 CPM ALPHA/PROBE AREA ON EXTERNAL SURFACES NOT IN CONTACT WITH THE PERSON.

4.16.4.2 FILTER CANISTERS FOR HASKS SHALL NOT BE RELEASED IF RADIOACTIVE

. CONTAMINATION EXCEEDS EITHER 100 CPM ALPHA/PROBE AREA OR 500 BETA/PROBE AREA AT CONTACT.

4.16 Basis The Maximum Permis!lible Concentrations (MPC) sho\oTn in Table I Appendix B of 10 CFR 20 are the concentrations of airborne radioactivity that a worker could breath throughout his forty hour work week and not inhale excessive radioactivity. As a routine procedure, NFS requires that if plant personnel may be exposed to such concentrations, no matter how.

short the exposure time, appropriate respiratory protection must be worn. As additional protection, NFS limits the use of filter masks to use in airborne concentrations which are expec.ted to be less than 100 times the HPC concentration even though the high efficiency filters used provide a protection factor of at least 100.

For use in airborne concentrations exceeding 100 times HPC (or a lm.rer concentration identified in the NFS Health and Safety Hanual), NFS requires the use of continuous flow supplied air equipment which is approved by the Bureau of Hines, a recognized authority in respiratory protection. Additional protection is afforded by an in-line filter, which would be used during an emergency exit in the unlikely loss of supplied air.

The protection factors of 100 for filter masks and 10,000 for supplied air or self contained breathing apparatus correspond to those given in proposed Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 20.

4.16 The contamination limits for reuse of masks and mask canistcrs are con-sis tent with the limitations for uncontaminated plant areas (Zone II) and'are eh~resscd in radiation units used at the plant. Specifications 4.16.4.1 and 4.16.4.2 are bascd upon (1) a 20% counting efficiency and 50 cm2 probe area for beta monitoring and (2) a 50i. counting efficiency and 75 em 2 probe area for alpha monitoring.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 235

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 236

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 237

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 238

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 239

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 240

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 241

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 242

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 243

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 244

5.5 5.5 HIGH RADIATION AREA ACCESS Applicability This specification applies to alternatives that may be used in lieu of the control devices specified in 10 CFR Part 20. 203(c) (2).

Objective To assure that personnel do not inadvertently enter areas where the radiation exposure potential may be significant.

Specification 5.5.1 LOCKED DOOR SHALL BE US ED TO CONTROL AD}1ITTANCE TO HIGH RADIATION AREAS WHERE A..~ INDIVIDUAL HIGHT RECEIVE A DOSE IN EXCESS OF 100 HILLIREH IN ONE HOUR. POSSESSIONS OF KEYS TO THESE LOCKS SHALL BE LIHITED TO NFS SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL.

5.5.2 IN PLANT AREAS WHICH CANNOT OR SHOULD NOT BE LOCKED, A SYSTEH OF STANTIONS CONNECTED BY ROPES WITH "HIGH RADIATION AREA"*

SIGNS ATTACHED SHALL BE USED TO OBSTRUCT ALL ACCESSIBLE SIDES OF A HIGH RADIATION AREA.

Basis 10 CFR 20.203 requires that a means be provided to warn personnel when they enter areas where the radiation exposure potential may be signifi-cant. The above procedures conform with the intent of 10 CFR 20. Some areas of the plant such as staircases that are necessary for evacuation

5.5 purposes have high radiation levels periodically. Since these areas cannot be readily locked and for safety reasons should not be locked the method described in this specification is used to alert personnel to high radiation areas so that they will not unintentionally enter these areas.

\

5.6 5.6 CONTAHINATION AND RADIATION CONTROL Applicabili tv This specification applies to the allowable maximum radiation and removable contamination limits for routine entry areas.

Objective To maintain adequate radiological conditions for the protection of the health and safety of plant personnel.

Specification 5.6.1 IRRESPECTIVE OF TilE USE OF PROTECTIVE CLOTHING, MAINTENANCE OF CONTM1INATED ZONE BOUNDARIES, AND THE APPLICATION OF EXIST-ING TECHNIQUES IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANT PROCEDURES, CONTAHINA-TION AND RADIATION LEVELS IN ROUTINE ENTRY AREAS SI~LL BE REDUCED TO BELOW THE FOLLOWING LEVELS WITHIN SEVEN DAYS AFTER DETECTION ~~D THE SOURCE OF CONTM1INATION OR RADIATION SHALL BE IDENTIFIED AND CONTROLLED.

REHOVABLE CONTAHINATION 2

BETA, DPM/100cm 50,000 2

ALPHA, DPM/100cm 500 RADIATION MAJOR PORTION OF BODY, MREM/HR 100 IF THE ABOVE REDUCTION IS NOT ACHIEVED IN THE TUm GIVEN, (A)

THE PROCESSING OPERATION REQUIRING ACCESS TO THE AREA SHALL

5.6 BE DISCONTINUED UNTIL THE CONTAMINATION OR RADIATION SOURCE IS 'IDENTIFIED AND CON+ROLLED AND CONTAMINATION AND RADIATION LEVELS ARE REDUCED TO BELOW THE ABOVE LIMITS AND (B) THE USAEC DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE SHALL BE NOTIFIED WITHIN 48 HOURS.

5.6.2 THE FOLLOHWG AREAS ARE EXEMPT FROM 5.6.1: CASK HANDLING AND SERVICE BRIDGE AREAS OF THE FUEL RECEIVING AND STORAGE AREA, .

SCRAP REI-l0VAL ROOM, HOT SHOP, WASTE BURIAL AREA, OFF-GAS BLOWER ROOM AND EXTRACTION CHEHICAL ROOM (REC;OVERED ACID AREA).

5.6.3 WHEN WORK INVOLVING FUEL UNLOADING OR STORAGE OR CASK DECON-TAl*nNATION IS NOT IN PROGRESS IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS OF THE FUEL RECEIVING AND STORAGE AREA, DECO~TAMINATION SI~LL BE STARTED WITHIN 12 HOURS OF THE END OF WORK AND ,THE AREAS SHALL BE DECONTAMINATED TO 13ELOW THE FOLLOWING LEVELS: ,

MAXIMU}! PER.~nSSIBLE CONTAHINATION LEVELS AREA ALPHA, DPM/IOO CM2 BETA DPM/100 CM2 Service Bridges 500 50,000 Cask Decontamination Area 500 500,000 Basis The level of removable contamination in routine work areas is determined at least daily by operations personnel. In addition, the areas are surveyed at least weekly by health and safety personnel.

5.6 The levels of contamination given in specification 5.6.1 reflect the removable contamination levels which if exceeded could cause the air-borne radioactivity to exceed the maximum permissible concentrations for 40-hours per week exposure. The limits are based on Plutonium-239 and Strontium-90. The radiation level given distinguishes between high radiation areas (specification 5.5) and other plant areas.

Plant areas named in specification 5.6.2 are excepted from the specified limits because the operations and work performed in these areas result in localized levels of contamination or radiation in excess of the specified limits. Personnel entering these areas wear respiratory pro-tec tion equipment appropria te for the contamina tion level and "lOrk is done under authorized special procedures.

The pool service bridge and cask decontamination areas may become con-taminated above the limits given in 5.6.1 while work is performed in the areas. The areas are separated from access areas by rope barriers and step-off pads. Personnel leaving the areas are required to survey themselves following removal of the oute~ work clothing. The procedures are designed to prevent the spread of contamination to other plant areas. When not in use, the areas are to be decontaminated to the limits specified in 5.6.2 to prevent spread of airborne contamination.

The program recognizes that contamination or radiation problems will periodically occur through human or mechanical failure or because of

5.6 the nature of the operations to be performed yet puts due emphasis on eliminating or controlling recurring problems.

'I,

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 251

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 252

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 253

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 254

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 255

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 256

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 257

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 258

TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS EXISTING SPECIFICATION PROPOSED REVISION No. Title No. Title 7.1 Administrative Requirments 7.1 Administrative Requirements 7.2 Procedures for Utilizing Res- 4.16 Respiratory Protection Equip-piratory Protection Equipment. ment 7.3 High Radiation Area Access 5.5 High Radiation Area Access 7.4 January 13 and 15, 1968 Letters 5.6 Contamination and Radiation Control 7.5 Category 10 Fuels Operating 7.2 Category 10 Fuels Operating Provisions Provisions

CHANGE NO. 20 UNITED STATE::

ATOMIC 'ENERGY COMMISSION WASHING'tOU. D.C. 7.0S-AS Docket No. 50-201 Nuclecr Fuel Services, Inc.

ATTN: Hr. J. R~ Cl.ark, Hanagcr

.. Environmental Protection and Licensi.ng 6000 Executive Boul.evard, Suite ,600 Bockville, riaryland, 20852 and Hew'York Atomic nnd'Space Developl!lent Authori,ty AnN: lir. Jar.les Cline General t-tannger

..... 230 Park Avenue CbangcNo. 20 H~' York, Nell York 10017 L1cense no. CSF-l

" CelltleDlcn:

nds rc!ers to }ClUI: request of }:ay'17, 1973 for ch..~gC& to tho Technic~l Specifications of License rIo. CSF-l which would sUspend certain specifi-cation requirements during the period the plant is shut down.

'. We have reviet,~ed the requested changes and have found that some of the proposed changes cannot be approved at this time. lhese are:

1. The change in Paragraph' 5C(4) of the license and in Technic~l Sp~cification 5.1.3 to modify the reporting period for plant opel'8ting reports from a quarterly to a semi-annual period.

License conditions cannot be changed throUGh a cbange in Technical Specifications.

2. The change in Technical Specification 5.1.4, Table 5.1, Items B.i, i1, iii. iv. v and vi to'reduce the sampling frequency from

• quarterly to Illl annual basis. This chanr,e is not acceptahle because sensonal data on depletion and transposition of radio-

~ isotopes in ,the wntershed is of interest from an environmental vie"'Point *

3. Thc~ cha.\l&t'! in Tl'chnica1 Specification '6.4 to reduce the frequency of operational chc::cl~s of standby equipment from a quarterly to a aCIni-annual 1>a:.:1 s. nlis ch.:mr,e is not ncccptable because the avail-nbHity nlld o{lC'r:1bility of stnndby utility equipmcnt is important fl.'Om n r.nh*ty I'oint of view even thour,h pll\Rt procct:sinC opcrntions arc sus{lendnd;

( - 2 We have determined th~t the other chnngcs requested, as listed and described in the enclosure to this letter, do not present significant hazards con-siderations and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered.

Therefore, pursuant to Section 50.59 of 10 CFR 50, changes to the Technical Specifications of Provisional Operating License CSF-l are authorized as sho~m in the enclosure to this letter. These changes shall remain in effect during the,period that plant processing operations are 81;1spellded.

FOR THE' ATOUIC ENERGY CO:-!MISSION

~C~ 'l~f~~ >>

- :- - .... . " L. C. Rouse, Chief .

,Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing

, ' Branch Directorate of Licensing

Enclosure:

1. Change 120, Revision  :

List

2. Safety Evaluation

\

Technical SP..s'_cHication Change No. 20 NFS R~?roccssinr. Plant License CSF-l Specification Number *Changes Authorized*

j 5.1.2* Suspend 1-131 sacple analysis and the use of Kr-85 and 1-131 monitors.

5.1.3 G Suspend liquid effluent analysis for. Sr-89.

5.1.3 If Suspend stack ef~luent analysis for Kr-85.

5.1:3 o. and 5.1.4, Table 5.1. Item A. xii 5.1.4, Table 5.1. ltecs

../

Suspend stack effluent analysis

.for I-l~1.

Suspend liquid effl,uent analysis B.vii and vi~i for S~89 and Zr/Nb-95.

5.1.4, Table 5.1. Items B~ xii. xiii and xv

. Suspend stack tlOnitClring for ~r-85 and stack sampling and analysis

./<

for 11-3 and Sr-89 *

.\

5.1.4. Table 5.1 *. Items B.xx t Suspend B-3 precipitation monitoring, xxii and , . xiii

._-- the collection of meteorological data and the Ci-sec/m 3 Kr-85 exposure determinations.

~

~

5.1.4. Table 5.1. Item C.i . J. Suspend the 1-131 analysis of milk

• 6.1. 3 . _ V' Suspend the require~nts for _

calibration of vessels containing boron I~schig r~n& poisons except for vessels 5D-13A. Band C. .

v Calibrate water monitors and alarms on a semi-annual rather than on a

• quarterly basis *

• Th~se technical s\lccifications arc s\l!':llendcd only for the period that reproccm:il\& operations arc suspended Olt the facility.

(Ch:I1lCe l~o. 20)

SAFETY EVALUATION

]!!.

TIlE FUEL FA~RICATIO}l !U~D REPROCESSU1G BRA..~CH DIRECTor~TE OF LICENSING

-Nuer.EAR, FUEL SERVICES, INC.

DOCKET 50-20i .

TEOtNICAL SPECIFICATION Authorizat'lon Requested C~~GE NO. 20 By letter dated May 17, 1973. Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc. (NFS) requested changes in the Technical Spe~ifications of License No. CSF-l to eliminate certain requirements they considered to be inappropriate during the period that reprocessing operations will be suspended. The majority of the changes requested relate to snalyses for radioisotopes w~ch will not be released while reprocessin& operations.are suspended o~ to analyses for relatively short lived isotopes which have essentially disappeared through

.' decay.' 'Other cbanges relate to modification of repo'!':ing periods. reduction in satdpling frequency. elimination of poisoned vessel calibration. reduction

'in the frequencY'of ope,rational checks of standby utility equipment and a reduction in the calibration frequency for water activity monitors.

B:lckcround Spent fuel reprocessinn operations t.'Cre suspended at the NFS "rest Valley Plant late in 1971. Since th:lt time, special . .

nucle~r material has been

removed from the process equipment and the,' equipment: has been f.:Atensive1y decont:Dminated. Special nuclear mat~*ria1 now on site (except for laboratory L1ateria1s) is stored as p1~tonium nitrate solution in shipping containers or in the form of spent fuel elements in the fuel storage pool.

".~ .

,The Technical Specifications written for the NFS license. especial1Y.those which apply to re1ea~es of radioactivity and environmental monitoring. '

represent requirements for an operating plant. The change'in plant. status justifies changes in those Technical Spe.cifications which are inappropriate for ~ reprocessing plant in which reprocessing operations have been suspended.

Safety and Environmental Considerations In this section of this Safety Evaluation. the changes requested by liFS are described, the safety and environmental considerations discussed and our conclusions as to acceptability. of each change presented.

1. 1-131 NFS has requested ~hat monitoring, sampling and analysis for 1-131 in stack gas be discontinued. Specification 5.1.2 requires that the

~

stack effluents. .. be continuously sampled. and. ,that the samples shall.

be analyzed at least every seven days for 1-131. .In addition. the specification requires that t:he 1-131 in the stack effluent be con-tinuously lUOnitored. Specification s.L 3 0 requires that the 1-131

rele~se, ~s the curnul~tive percent of the yc~rly licit, be reported for each month in the quarterly reports.* Specifi~~tion 5.1.4, Table 5.1,. Item A.xU.requires that the curies of 1-131 r.cleased from the stack be determined for each month and ~ie reported in the environmen':'

tal monitoring reports. Specificntion 5.1.4, Table 5.1, Item C.i requires that local milk be sampled and analyzed for I~131 if 1-131 releases exceed 30 millicuries per veek.

Iodine-13l vill be present in the spent fuel stored in the pool but 1~will not be released until the fuels are reprocessed except. possibly.

...... from leaking spent fuel elements. The amount of l.odine expected to leave leaking element is s1Mllj and in addition. leaking elements can ..

be easily :I,de,neified and controlled i f necessary. The 1-131 content of wastes from prior reprocessing operations vhich are stored on site has been reduced to an insignificant level through decay. Continued monitoring, sampling and analysis for 1-131 in plant stack effluents and l~cally produced milk is unnecessary for either safety or environ-mental reasons. *

2. Kr-85 NFS haa requested that Technical Specifications requirements for monitorin& and reporting Kr-85 content in' stack gases and for calcu-

• lating popul~tion exposures due to Kr-85 be suspended

• c*

Specification 5.1.2 require:: that the Kr-85 content of stack gas be continuolisly monitored. Specification 5.1. 3 N requires that the maximum percent o~ the Kr-85 daily limit in the stack effluent for each month be reported in thc quarterly op'erating reports. Specifi-cation 5.1.4, Table 5.1, Items n~~i and BxXiii requires that Kr-85 releases be determined and e,."osure~ calculated and reported in environmental reports.

At the h~S plant the noble gases in spent fuel are released quantitatively .

• when thefucl is processed and are dispersed to the atmosphere via the* main plant stack. There will be no release of IX-8S from the reprocessing plant while

~perations are suspended excep~, possibly, from It-ak:i.ng svent [u(.l ele:ncnts stored in the fuel. Any leakage from stored fuel would be small compared to the daily release limit of 12,600 curies per day and would be so diluted in the stack discharge that offsite exposures would be undetectable. Continued monitoring and reporting of Kr-S5 releases and estimation of Kr-85 exposures

~lile the plant is shut down will serve no useful purpose.

3. H-3

• NFS bas requested that specifications relating to stack releases of tritium and the amount of tritium in rainwater . . be discontinued.

The qpantity of tritium released via the stack and the quantity of tritium ill rainwl1ter at site perimeter sampling stations m\lst be

determined and reported in the environ!llental reports according to Specification S.l.ll, Table 5.1, Items Bxiii and Bxx.' Stack discharges of tritiuin'and,t,ritium in raim-later from.l)lant operation should be insignificant when no dissolution or fuel processing operations are

• .,erformed; and there is no need for continued analysis or reporting of data.

4. Sr-89 andZr/Nb-9S NFS has requested that the analysis and reporting of Sr-89 and Zr/Nb-9S'contentof waste streams be eliminated.

Specifications 5.1.3 G. 5.1..4. Table S:l. Items Bvii. viii' and xv '

require analysis and reporting of Sr-89 or Zr/~~9S in liq~id and gaseous wastes. These isotopes have relatively short half lives (53 days for Sr-89 and 6S days for Zr/Nb-9S) and therefore the release potential has decreased significantly since processing operations were stopped. Continued analysis for these isotopes is unnecessary from bo~h the safety and environmental viewpoints.

S. Calibration of Poisoned Vessels NFS has requested that periodic calibration of ,~ssels containing boron-&las~ or boron-steel Raschig P~ncs for criticality control be eliminated.

Specification 6.1. 3 requires that ve'ssels containing boron-elass or b()ron-st'ainless steel lUlschiC Rinr,s be: calibrClted every two years to

.~: ';: '.

detcrmi;ne that the volu:ne of rings per* unit of packed height bas not chonged J:l..'1tcrially. lnth the suspension of plant operations. no use is heing .or \lui be !:lade of these vessels. NFS has commit ted to recalibrat~ the vessels prior to their reuse. Plant safety will not

. be cotnproJ:l.i.sed by apPl'oving the UFS request.

6. Calibration of water monitors NFS has requested that the provision of Technical Specification 6.9.1

• that requires testing of radiation alarm systems

."... . on condensate

. and cooling water system on a monthly basis ~e changed to a semi-annual

~

basis. The process use of both cooling wa~er and steam i~ limited because of the suspension of plant activities. In addition. the rad;o-activity in process vessels served by the water and steam systems (except waste tanks) has been reduced by decontamin~tion operations.

Condensate from the neutralized hi'gh-Ievel waste tank heaters is not recycled; it ~s analysed and released or evaporated. Cooling water from the stainless steel high-leyel waste tonk is monitored at the tank and again in the utility area. These factors. combined With past favorable exper.ience with the installed monitors. demonstrates that changing the testing schedule will not adversely affect plant safety.

7. Chanse in Schedule }o'or Operating Reports HFS lias requested that the sch~dule for phnt operAting reports be chanted .from a quarterly to a semi-nnnual basis. The quarterly schedule

. "0".

.' . , .. ,:. ~

'::'1~ i~~iuded ill paragraph C (4) of the license and cannot be changed through a change in Technicai Specificat'ions. The sc~edule of Specification 5~1.3 for reporting releases of radioactivity is based, on paragraph C (4) and cannot be changed without modification of license paragraph C (4). The requested changes cannot be, authorized in this change to Technical Specifications. " '

~' ,

8. Change In Frequency of Sampling NFS has requested that Specification 5.1.4, Table 5.1, Items B.i

....". .tbrough vi, be changed to require annual rather than quarterly collection and analysis ,of- Buttermilk Creek samples. -The deplet'ion and transposition of radionuclides in the watershed 15 icportant from an environmental point of view. 'Annual sampling would not

.~ '. ~:

adequately show seasonal variations or depletion rates. The NFS ,'I.

request for this' change should be rejected.

9. Operational Checks of ~tandby Equipment NFS has requested that the frequency of operational checks of 8tandby equipment listed in Specification 6.4 be changed from a quarterl, to semi-annual basis. No information was submitted to demonstrate, that semi-&lnual tests would ~e adequate to assure the avaihbility and operability of standby equipment. We disagree with this'request because the availability of standby utility equipment i8 ialportant from a safety point of view even thouCh plant operations ",'

have been suspended.

Conchlsion . .

, Based on our review of the changes to TechniCal Specifications described in Par.agraphs 1-6 ~bove, we conclude that they do not present significant hazards considerations and that there is reasonable 'assurance that the health and safety of the public ,will not be endangered. This conclusion is. based on' the following facts:

1) Reprocessing operations are suspended at the plant and continued.

monitoring, sampling and analysis for isotopes which have either

• decayed, significantly or are releas~d in significant quantities only d~ring operations is unnecessary to protect the health and safety of

'the public; and furtheroore, the data which would have been gained from the suspended monitoring i~ not needed for our environmental evaluation of the facility.

2) Periodic calibration of the poisoned vessels wltich are .empty and will Dot be used 'while plant operations' are suspended is unnecessary. and;

3) A reduced caliLration fr~quenc~ for the water monitors is justified because of reduced radioactivity in process equipment and because of past favorable operating c):perience with the monitors.

We recommend that the changes described in Paragraphs 7-9 above be denied because (1) they are not suitable subjects for Technical Specification til * *

• changes or (2) the changes could have an adverse effect on plant safety or envi~onrncnta1 monitorine.

Approval of the attached Change No., 20 to the Technical, Specifications of Liccns~ CSF-l is recommended *

• _. -.0 0*'0_

Signed 7r'a, 2'~

\I,. 'A. Nixon /

Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Branch Directorate of Licensing

'Approved ....;ot.1~~..;C: . . .:- :~'*..;!'i<~*~;:::;.~1~t==~___*

-- 0*.

• L. C. Rouse, Chief

. "':-- - , Fuc!l. Fabrication and Reprocessing

....... .. , . Branch Directorate of Licensing

. \.

"f)-lic" ~ ....

ft I' h _ _ _ _ "":'

This s"ccific~:io:l ..~,,.U~S to the sa::,1i~~ and anal::si:; of Z3SCOU5 and li~uid plant effluc:lts and to enviror.:ental :onitor1ng *

- -_. __ ..* Objective' - .. -.......... -- --.---- - ---------

To establish sar.pl1ns roinu. 'L~?li}\!',' frequency and sa..""Iple analyti-

'cal requirc::~r.tsfor ~seous and li~uid plent effluents L,d to

~tablish~'.nviron=ental :cnitorin3 progr~ and reporting require=ent, Spccific:::tio:,\

5.1.1 ~t~:E\'E!t

. LIQU!D* IS DISC:L~CE:D no~! TRE STOaACE LAC".cO~:S. A ItEPlCS~lT.~Tr::: S:.::nE S:'.\LL ~t :>Intt>!;':>:~ 3'i Ti.E C.\n'A....:.uC~S CREt:{ CO:;-rI::t;.:;;S S/.:'~L:?. AT Lt.\ST E\':::~Y S:':"'I:~: DAYS. A CC:~

POSIT! 0:' ntIS S;':'::LZ S?.'l.L 3E A::!.LYZ:::D J'O~ T~ITIt;~1.

.:J PJn'H:.!:tt.::t 106. :OT."J. }.!.!'!!.". ."::!l TOTtJ. Ilri.\ P';.:>IOACTI\'I,!,!

• IF 'rnE COm'I::tO!.l5 S"':'1'Lr.~ !::co~!!S n;Ol'E='J.TI\7.. llP TO Z .uu~. yOO CAL!..O~:S '!:\Y BE !)ISc:t:~C::Dno:~ T:!E 1..\(;00:,5 1:: .\W O!:E-Y!Nt PEtIOD PROVID!D CAn~1At:r.tiS cr.l:~ S.'Il*!PLES ;.r~ COi.I.£~!'::i ::r:;",~

.'!'HE co:;-rU:l.:01.iS S;'::l'L::~ LO:....l'IO:~ FeR £:.CH LU".oO:: DISC:-iA~CE O!:

!'Oll EAC!t 100 ,C~:l CALLO:*:S or D!SCIU.it::E. l..'HICliEV1:!t P..F_C;~"I.TS I::

tHt CR!.\UR. S:':~LI~;C F:'.E~t."Z::CY. S.~I?LES SO COLLEC!!!) SHALL :lE n:DIVID!:.\LLY .\:;:.l.YZZ!) FO:! T!'.ITIL~*l. nUT1i~lIt::'I 106. TOTAL .\L?ilA I..'m TOTAL IE'r.;' !.\DIOAC":IVI'!Y.

5.1.2 THE lW>IOAC'IIVIl'! I!i ST:..C!C EF!'Lt1D'IS SHALL BE com~t.'OUSLY S>>lPLED. tHE S.\!:PUS saU.L 3£ A:ULUtl) AT LEAST EVERY SE\'D DAYS FOR A:m P.\P.TICtlUl'E RADIOACTIVITY.. IF 'IRE SUCK SA:!PLER BECO~1ES L,\OPEllo\TIVE. nClEDIATE lUl'AIll SHALL IE I!iSTInrn:I> 1'0 urtlU 'rAE SA:-lPLER to SERVICE.

IN ADDITIO:. TO 'IBE !~y S&1PLES OB'L\.~ED FROM THE SUCK, THE PAltTIct:UTE l!.ADIOAcrIVITY ~: .'niE STACK GAS SH.U.L BE co:rrt:nrOUSLi St."3JECl' TO DEn:CTIO:: BY A SUCK ~:O::Il'OR.

"'-- (ChaDge No. 20)

--~----......,., .. ---:- ~ ......... - : II *

- 4) -

IF Ti!E S7.','.:~: S!.!'?!.!::t !tC::T:S I~;C?:~:l'I\:'. r.=~:!)tATZ rJ:PAIlt SH/J..L :::  !:::::'!:-::-:::l !J  :.:-:t:~=: r:~e l~:IT 1'0 SEr.:~.'tCt, .\!:U THZ

~,..c:: ~.::-:. :~~~:-: S:!:. :': ;i!: ::S~i) I:: ~i~ t::n~4:: to i)t;TER!!I::E 1-131 A::D ,,a.Z':t I.c:..'.::r~ F.'=;:L!'\S'::S.

IF tHE S7,\C;': ~:O::I'!O:t &'AILS: A !'.hP?.ESE~"T:'TI"':: S'\~~L! or TRt IADIOAcn',4!"i 1:: S!AC" ::-~Lt:t::.S S:t:.LL ~:;: C~tL::C'l'!:!) F.:.Cil

- _ . - SHIn :.:;., t,:S!:i) -TO Ot:T::::m:S**I-131,\:;i) tlt,*R!::r.. pr.!IOnS }.!:D- _____ .

PA!:.l'IC"L.'t.*..':'£ .:'.:\:lIt':.crI~.':n

• T.!I: !:r-SS CO:;!E~:T OF ST..\C::

c;.s£s D:::::::G ?Z:'.IOJS ~::i.~: t!I£ S*U.C:: l:O::Il'O~ IS I~C:'E:&'.ATI\'E

• SP.*.u.r.. S£ C,;\LC;:\!:D no:! n'1:L tt:?.!:lI"P DA'!}**

5.1.3 m ro'ttG"'m;G r.:O:::.\T!O::, m:rE?:rr::c ~O~l nI:: S."':*TLES T}J...~~ AS Pl:QUIr-.tD t'l 5.1 ..1 A::D 5.1.2; (en, ZOP. 1-12~, L...~OO:-: SA:tPLES)

-_.'--- -.. ..SHALL BE !::CLtI"!>ED L~ nu: OUA:.T£:u.'Y

. OPEP.t.Tr.;C P..1'"20RT:

.0 .

.

• A) TOUl. c:t.'i'I::S OF ALPHA ACTIVI'rY DlSOt.~~Ctj) INTO CATIA?...\L1CUS CREEK EACH .:O:mi.

B) TOTAL ct~u:s O&' BEL.... ACTIVITY DIS ClL\."C£:D II:IO CATTAi1AUGL-S CREEK EACit m::m.

_~) CT.mI!S or TRl'l"ItJ!! DISCHf.n.CtD 11:40 CI..rr.\p.J.UCUS CRZ~ EACH

---

-}t')l'tTri. . ..*... . . * --.

I>> CU",Jts OF RU-l06 DISCHARCED n:-ro CL'"'T'\:'~UCt:s CP.EtK EACH

)fONTH.

E) CURIES OF CS-ll7 DISCi.UGtD L'fIO CATrAP.J,UCUS cRtn EACH

!lm'B. .

-_._-1')

CURIES OF CS-134 DlSQL\P.CED 1::1'0 CATT/.!'.At:~US ClU:EK EACH tm:TH.

Q) CURIES OF SR.-90 DlSQUu~CED ItitO CATT~\.'t.\t:Gt1S CREEl: EACH tmnl.

B) Ct."P.I!:S OF 1-129 DlSCiU~1tCED ~:TO cr.TTAr.J..~Gt:s CREE:: EACH

~ni.

1) 'THE PEP-Cr.*:T OF 10 cn 20.106& Ll:tITS TOn. ~\DIo'\cnVI!Y IN C\'!rA,,\rr.::s C~::::~ A','"Z~"'C:E:> tOR F_;'CH :~?~CTI\'Z ~~:;r:i OF 'THE puca!I~C Qi:A?-:til.

(Change No. 20)

~ ---

..J:

K) 'mz P::7C:::~ or 10 C:*:-. l!l .1063 u:!I'rs ro~  ?...:'~Io ... cn\T.

STRo::rlt::! 1',1::1 C:-:3!!."7~  :,:;O!O?:s I:: c.*~nn.":",!.~G~*S c~.zr:::

A\7.~*.r,:~J r~~ ~*\C.i :.r:;~::i!':: ::::;~d OF* T.~!: ~:l'O;t!'I::C Q~~\1~I::::t.

L) CUr-lES Oll' P:..~l'IC!';1..~E.i; ~DlSC:i.~CtD VI4\ TllE Sl':'CX rOll EACH

}:o:m1.

---

.--------------------- .----------------~-----------------------------------

.1) tP.E 1'r.~c_:;;'l' or ~::! :,ro::nILY ~c:~:tc.1.I. SPECIT'lCNrtO:: LI:*tIT FOl DI~i:::.*~~!: or "tr\~*;:Ict~L,*~r:;s \,,!;\ tilE S'rAC'~.

Basis -_ *. _ *. " -- _. - ----.:-=-~-~-::;.":.:;.-::.=..:""~ . .;..,::--=-=-",

o

,______S,3:lples of t...ater froe, Cattarzu;us Creel~ are taken vith a continuous sepler loeated a~e'.lt one-half 1:I11e c!t;r.mstrec fro1:l the confluence:

of Cattaraugus and ~utte~ilk Creeks. Portions of each veekly s~ple ~re ~oQ?esited to product a s~~~le representative of o~e conth's discharse. The ~eekly s£r.l'ies are analyzed for gross alpha.

gross bet4, t=iti~~ ~nd rutneni~~ 106. r.~e co~?osi~e is analyzed for gross Alpho, gross beta strentiu: 90. strontium 89. cesi~ 134, cesi~ 137, ruthe~i~~ 106 and trl:lu=.

A .tre~ gage located near the saapllng station 1s used to detercine total flcr.: in ~ttar::u:;us Creet;. nov fret! the lar,t'on 1s deterci~ed by a c£librated veir located on ~~e ~lscharr.e line. The flov ratio 11 used in conj~~ction ~lth the io~ine 1%9 an~lysis of lagoon vater to calculate the iodine 129 con ten: 1n Cattaraugus Creek. .

Gaseous pl:mt effluents are .=~led 1n t.'le plane steck. The stac'~

sacplcr cent~ins a filter to collect particulates and cn activated charcoal filter to collect iodi~c 131. Sa~les cre re~~ved fro~

the stack s~~pler at least each ~~ek an~ L~alyzed.

the stack ~onitor is used to continuously d.te~ine the ~art1culate.

iodine 131 :md kr:~ton 35 ra~ioactivity in che stack air an~ to alert operator~ 1f ~re:-sct li=its are excee~ea. Tne narticulate s~~ler is ch.:~~C!:.l c ..*er~" d :'0:::5 .:na -:111 ::l:l~ w~: ::':ft :J.cc:~~:.:!.:::;o~ ~:

particul&te r~dioactivity over an 8-hour period exceeds that which

• (ChaDge 30. 20)

.., - -.....---.......,..--.....-,- :-r:orr:......- -,-:-.._-

-~ ......... ,. - -_.....

- 46b -

A. The licc~se~ shall dete~ine for edch eonth. b~~ed on s;cples takc~

at the ~die~ted location and oth~r iniorc3tion collected during tte

~--*~-_th.* the !oll~J:L:l8: . .- .. - - - . -----.. .._--

1 Total c~ries of beta radio~ctivity other than trit1u:

. --- released at effluent ve1r. --- - - - - ---- ... - - - - - . -

11 Total curies Of.* uflha radioa~t1vity released at the effluent weir.

11i Curies of triti~ released at.effluent veir.

1v Curies' of strontiu= 90 released at effluent weir.

v Curies of cesi~ 134 released at effluent weir.

vi Curies of cesiu~ 137 released at efflu~~t weir.

vii Curies of ruthenium 106 and rbod1um 106 released a~ effluent weir.

viii Voluee of vater released at effluent weir.

1x ~olu:e of vater flov ~roush site in Cattaraugus Creek.

x Curies of beta e=1ttiDI particulates released via the stack

• xi Curies of alpha e=ittin;

• p~rtieulates* released via the stack.

xii Curies per cubic :etcr ~ros. beta radioactivity of particulates (avera;c and r~~i=~) collected by each of the 3 site perir.cter sa:plers on filter pa~cr. .

xiii Curies per cuhic ~.ter ~ross alpha radioactivitv of ~artieu lates (avera~e. anei C3x1:::.::) collected by eacil of the 3 site per1:eter .~plers aD filter paper.

(Olanse !fOe 20)

- . . . . - . - -.... -- ... --~ *. ~" ... - .o. .*** ..,... _ .... . .....- ~~.,.-.--' - -- .. . - --.. -

J' - 46c -

B. The licc:1sce sl\;lll ~ctc:r.::i~e e"ch C;u~:-:er. b::sed on s':'::jlles and ot!.** t" infon:::ticn collected d".Jrin;; th!! c;u:::rter. the fol10.~:in!;:

1 Idcntitj" of !,rir:ci:-.:l r:dionuclidcs whose ~resl!nce can be c!et(!~i:'!~~  :';:.*.: .::::~.:t s~.;~c:::"t)=':CO?:1 of :1 !lC'!!:pltl (o~c p:::t' c:~l( ~.*~.lr q1:arter) of ~u::cr.'.il;~ Creek bottol:l silt collected at the tho;~s Corner ~.::i ~riC:;Q

• M1crocuries*~er ~~ total"beta r~dioaetivity of a sa=ple (onc per cQl<<:nciar c;uar::er) o.t :uttc:ni1~ Crcc;~ batteD silt collected at ~.e r.~o~ Corner PD~ bridge.

111 .ficrocuries J'er !J:'C totd 2:.lpha rt>di:l2:.::ti*:i::1 of A sa:'!plt!

(one per calencar 'luartcr) of 3utter::::!.1k. Cr:!el~ botto::! silt collected at the Tnocas Corner P~~cl brid;e" 1v tRcrocuries tri~i~ per cilliliter of water collected once per q~arter at the Dutternilk Creek silt sa=~lin~ location during a nOr.:1al liquid eHlucnt release iro~ the plant *

.0 v },.1crocuries total betA rac.ica::tivity ~er cilliliter .of watt*r*

collected once ~er quarter at the 5utten:lill~ Creek silt sanplieg loc~tion dur~~ a norcol liquid effluent release

-.- f:c: :1-.: ;:1::::. . ........_ ........ _.- ----.-

vi Microcurie. total alpha radioactivity per ~illiliter of water collected once per quarter at the 3utte~ilk Creek silt u::pl.ing location during a DOmal eifluent rcle:lSe frr'"

the pla."l t

• Curies of iodin2 129 ~eleased at effluent weir.

vili A qUL"ltitativa a~alysis of alpha emittin3 co=ponents in a quarterly cc::?osite collected at the ef!lue~: ,":e1r.

zi, the exposure, in megawatts clay** of fuel dissolved durin~

the quarter.

zi,l . Cudes of iociine 129 released via the stack" zi1i Curi.s of strontium 90 released via the stack.

xiv Curies of ruthenium 106 rlaased via *the stack.

(Chan;e ::a" 20)

---

- ..... .~--- .... ._.,-- ...:-. -. * ..*- ..._---=--- ........ - ......- '.-.... _- '-." ---'--.-"--' .. -

- "\Os -

~.'

c*

• The lice!tsee shall detereinethe following information according to the schedule given:

1 Durifta August of each year the licensee shall collect a milk sa::Iph froc a fare within 2-112 miles of the plant in the north-wes t sector and a CI.il.k sample from a farm within 2-1/2 miles of the plant in the north-east sector.

!be u:nples shall be composites of oue day'. production froID cows which are on pasture. Each sample shall be analyzed separately to determine:

. " __ It) Mlcrocuries.atrontium 90.F~r milliliter c) Hlcrocuries cesium 134 per ailll1!ter d) Microcuries ct$iuo 137 per milliliter 1i &~rins the sp.cc~d and third quarters of each year, licensee shall t3ka fish s~~~les froe C3tta~nugus Crc~~ be~Jcen the Sprin~*ille hydroelectric d~ and tr.e C3ttara~gus Creek-Duttct":ilk Creek confluence. (be SC!?le shu.l be taken durin~ e~ch of the t~o ~uarters; A sa:~le nha11 consist of at least 9 fish. each at 1e3st six inches 1on~. Each fish in each s~ple shall be analyzed to detereinc:

a) Median and ~eo~etric deviation of cesi~ 134 =iero-curies per kilo&r~ of flesh.

It) ~.dlan and ~eo~etrie devi4tion of ce.luo 137 micro-curies per k11ogr~ of flesh.

c) Median and leo~etric deviation of .tron:iua 90 aicro-curie. per kilolr~ of fl.s~.

i11 ~~ring the second and third quarters of each year, licensee shall take fish samples frem Cattaraugus Creek be~.een the Springville hydroelectric dam and the Cattaraugus Cree!:-

Buttermilk Creek confluence. One sample shall be taken I

during eae.'l of the tt. . o quarters. A sa1:lple shall consist of I at least 9 fish, e~ch at least six inches long. Each fish in each sample shall be analyzed to determine: I a) ~!edian and geometric deviation of cesiUlll 134 micro- ,

I curies per kilogram of flesh. /

b) Median and geometric deviation of cesium 137 micro-curies per kilogram of flesh.

( c) Median and geOJDetric deviation of strontium 90 mero,.. I curies per kilogram of nub. /

(Chale No. 20;

--~,!",P-- .. -~ .......... -----.-...---.-.'--.......... ~_~ .....~ .*~~ ............... 4. ,.

Page withheld as containing Export Controlled Information 279

A~ .. H C2101 frill"',. _... 1"~-v This s~eclficatlo~ ~e~.~~.s p.rie~!c v.=i~lcation of ~~~ope~ability of the ala=:s usae ~o da:c:~ ex:essive raci;activlty in cooling wa~er or steam cc~ce~sa:a retu=~f: f=o~ ~~e c~ils or jackets used to control temperature or vessils cor.taini~9 radioactiVity_

~j To provlce added assu=ane~ of pre~~t detection of excessive radioactivity 1n ste~~ ccnde~sa~a anc.cocli~g wa~er.

6.9.1 THE OPERaILIlY OF EACH IADIATIO!l ALARM SYSTEM ~lO!ilTORDG REl'UR!n:D

. CONDD'SAn: OR COOLI:.G t~ATER SHALL BE TESTED AT LEAST SE:u:~..:ru.u.LY BY THE APPLl-CAno:: OF A P~-u)L-1.~IC:; SOt::tCE. t:*:IE.DIATE A.:iD CONTU;l1ING EFFORI SHALL AE DllECTED TO REPAIR A.~Y SYSTEM roUND INOPERABLE.

Bases SU3::1 anc cooHng water are used for ~eat1r-9 ano coolir-g of process.

solutio~s. rna ~=essures of these hea~ transier fluids are ~isher tt** n th~ie 0: the p;~~ei~ i~l~t1~n in O=~er ~o ~in~14e 16iki3e of radioactivity if a ~assage s~oulc develop between a process solution i ar-d a heat t=a~s;e= fluid. In additi:n, raeiatior- =oni~ors are incor-poratad i:-:to the piping ~*:~e=e the nea~ ccr-canute and cO::lli:-.; rater retu~ns t.~ t~e u-::'1.!:ti" =:0::'1. 7".. ese :.jrai:tcrs ala:-c in ce:t.:;:ied .reas "ten excessive =a=!.oic-:!V~':Y 1. ':e':ectee.* ::T.:=t~e= assu=a::ce is ~=ovice:t by the =n:::~*:!.sc *:ollc:~io:,. anc ar.alys:'s '::: retu:r.e:i co::den!:a";e anei a radlatio~ =on:'~o: a~ ~.e o~~!e~ :r:~ the coolin; coils ci h:.;n leval, stainless s-:cal wane sto=a;e tarJes. .*

Since the ra=iatio:: inst~~e::~1 are r.ad at l.ast once ~er sr.li~ testir.;

of t~e radia-:i:n a~a==s onc.~e: ==n~~ ~s suifici.nt to verify 61a:=

functiona~ility.

...... ~

.. (ChADle :io. 20)

. .... " . -. . -~

~-., .. -.--.

CHANGE NO. 21 Messrs. R. W. Dcuster R. V. Curry W. H. Lewis II. W. Brook

. N. J. Newm~n

~ E. L. StanJ FEB 2 8 i974 E. D. North L:flaPP:FAC W. A. Oldham 50-201 Newman, Reis , Axelrac

. Washington, O. c.

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. W. V. Licensing File ATTN: 1.Jr. J. R. Clark, r*:an.:t.ger Environmental Protection and Licensing 6000 'Executive Ooulcvard Suite 600

.. Rockville, 14aryland 20852 and New York Atomic and Space Development Authority AnN: !-Ir. L. Strongin Secretary and Assistant Counsel 230 Park Avenue

'. New York, New York 10017 Change No. 21 License tIo. eSF-l Gentlemen:

-I,

.'e hc.ve reviewed your security plan dated Jar,uilry 7, 19i4 for the West Valley Fuel Reprocessing Plant, and Revision 1 to that plan dated February 19, 1974, \'Jhich I'lere submitted in accordance with

• 10 eFR 50.54(q).

In order to accept your plan, as revised by Revision 1, we find it necessary to strengthen certain aspects of your security program.

Accordingly, pursuant to 10 eFR 50.36(b) and 10 eFR 50.109 and 10 eFR 70.61(a), Change No. 21 in the Technical Specifications of License CSF-l is hereby made adding a lJel'l Section 9.0, "Facility Security", to Appendix B, effective ~iarch 6, 1974. .

You m3Y request a hearing "/ithin 20 days of the dat:! of this letter with respect to all 01* any part of the additional specifications set forth in Section 9.3 of the enclosure. It has been determined that the prompt establishment of the measures to protect plants of licensees against acts of sabotage is r~~ir~...thc int~~~!s__~f __

.1bLP4~ 1; c_~ea 1th a!lLSa fety..: Therefore, any reques i for a hea l*i ng will not stay the i*larch 6, 1974 effective date of these specifications *

~

~ ..... . . ,.

Nuclear Fuel Service~ - 2 .:. FEB 2 a 1974 New York Atomic and Space Development Authority As requested, we have granted an extension in time for you to achieve compliance with certain of the requirements of 10 CFR Part 73. You will nete, hO\-/ever; that "Ie have granted an extension of only 60 days.

We do not believe a longer extension of time should.be authorized.

Note that changes in your approved security plan must be made in accordance "/ith 10 CFR 50.54 (p) * . . ,

We have established that your security plan submitted to our office on February 19, 1974, contains informat.ion of a type specified in 10 CFR 2.790(d). Accordingly, pursuant to Section 2.790(d), the enclosure is deemed. to be commercial or financial information \-/ithin the meaning of 10 CFR 9.5(a)l4) and shall be subject to disclosure only in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.10. For the same reason, "Ie are withholding the attachmentS to the enclosure of this letter from public disclosure.

Sincerely,

.! .*.. ~~~ .

. R. G~g,-Chief Materials and Plant.Protection Directorate of Ljcensing .

Enclosure:

• Change No. 21 to Technical Specification, License. ,

No. CSF-l

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d) 9.0 Facil ity S~curity 2

c n

l

.. I.:

. ~! *

.. ~

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

~ 2 _.

r r

l 8 r

\

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d) f e

~.

• '. .... * . , . * *. I

\.

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

'0 c.

.r')'

., . .. .~

\

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

ATTACHi-!ElIT 1 o

. 0"

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

AT,TACHt,lENT 2

CHANGE NO. 22 I

.~

.... UNITI!D STATES ": .

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. ~05~S OCT 21 .* "

J. R. ClARK L: FFRB2: RSI~

50-201 otT'} S 1974 * . tt/

{1~ ., ':.

, Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark, Manager Environmental Protection and licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard. Suite 600

~~~ t-~7:,.

Rockville, Maryl and 20852 And New York Atomic and Space Development Authority ATTN: Mr. James Cline

, General Manager 230 Park Avenue , Change Ho. 22 New YOl'i<. New York 10017 , .

License ,No. CSF-1 Gentlemen:

~'

This refers to the NFS request dated January 14. 1974. for a change to Technical Specifications of Provisional Operating license No.

CSF-l. The proposed change to Specification 7.1 Administrative Requirements. requests authorization to formally establish the position of General Manager (previously titled Site Manager) at the Reprocessing Plant, to limit the scope of the Technical Services Manager's responsibility for nuclear safety reviews to those proDosed changes which are initiated at the plant and are not being pursued under the license amendment application dated October 3. 1973. and to delete the position of Assistant General Manager from the NFS Reprocessing Plant organization chart. Also. paragraph 7.1.1.7

-Minimum Qualifications of the Plant Safety Conmittee positions" submitted September 20. 1974 to Technical Specifications 7.1 is to be incorporated. ' ., .

We have reviewed the information submitted by Nuclear Fuel Services.

Inc. and have determined that the change in Technical Specifications

(0 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. I And New York Atomic and Space Development Authority ..

designated as Change No. 22 and set forth on enclosed pages 70'and 7t does not present a significant hazards consideration, and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public witt not be e n d a n g e r e d . '

Accordingly, pursuant to Section 50.91 of Title la, Code of Federal Regulation, Part 50, the change in Technical SpecificatiOn 7.1 of Provisional 'Operating License No. CSF-l is authorized.

FOR THE ATOMIC ENERGY COr-v*\ISSfON

-Q":4 Z=-.

~~inchester c

.~~

Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Branch No. 2 ')'.~.

Directorate of Licensing .  : ..

~."

Enclosures:

Pages 70 and 71

~

7.1 ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMD.'TS APPLICABILITY

• This specification establishes administrative standards for governing

~

the operation of the facility.

OBJECTIVE

.To assure that a management .ystem responsive to the ..fety needs of the operation is established and maintained. .

SPECIFICATION 7.1.1 ORGANIZATION. FOR PURPOSES OF MAINTAINING SAFE OPERATION A!.'D CONTROL OF THE FACILITY AND OF ATTENDANT ACTIVITIES. NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES. INC ** SHALL PROVIDE tlANAGEMENT OF THE PLANT TBROCGH A.~

ADMINISTRATIVE FWIEWORK INCLUDING. BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWI!\G:

7.1.1.1 A GENERAL MANAGER. HAVING OVERALL RESPONSIBILITIES FOR ALL ACTIVITIES AT THE PLANT SITE.

7.1.1.2 A PLANT MANAGER. REPORTING TO THE GENERAL MANAGER. DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL ACTIVITIES AT THE PLANT INVOLVING PRODUCT!ON, iIEAL'.l'H ANLI SAFE1'Y. ~UCLEAR SAFt:TY AND ADHt:RENCE TO THi: LIl'iIi'S Aiili CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THIS LICENSE.

7.1.1.3 AN OPERATIONS MANAGER. REPORTING TO THE PLANT tlANAGER, RESPONSIBLE FOR CARRYING OUT PRODUCTI9N ACTIVITIES IN ACCORD~:CE WITH APPROVED PROCEDURES AND ACCEPTED HEALTH A.~ SAFETY STA..'ID;'.PJ>S.

7.1.1.4 A HEALTH AND SAFETY t!ANAGER. REPORTING TO THE PLANT MANAGER. RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING THE RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY OF ALL

. PLANT ACTIVITIES AND FOR ADVISING ALL DEPARTMENTS ON RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY tlATTERS.

7.1.1.5 A TECHNICAL SERVICES MANAGER. REPORTING TO THE PLA..~

MANAGER. RESPO~SIBLE FOR A CONTINUOUS REVIEt~ OF OPERATIONS TO ASSURE NUCLEAR SAFETY.

(Change No. 22 Revisio~)

7.1.1-.6 A PLANT SAFETY COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE FOR: REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF ALL STAriDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES AND LETTERS OF ;'uTHORIZATION; REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF ALL CHANGES IN THE PROCESS, THE PROCESS SYSTE~', AND STAr:DARD OPERATING PROCEDURES; INVESTIGATION OF ABNORMAL OCCURRENCES WHICH ~AY AFFECT RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY OR CRITICALITY PREVENTION; AND RECOMMENDATION QF ~IEASURES WHICH WILL PREVENT REPETIiION OF SUCH ABNOR:*;AL OCCURRENCES. THE COMMITTEE SHALL CONSIST OF, BUT NOT 6E LIIUTED TO. THE PLANT MANAGER, THE TECHNICAL SERVICES NAi:AGER, THE HEALTH AND SAFETY MA.~GER AND THE OPERATIONS ~lANAGER.

-7.1.1.7 THE MINIf.rur~ QUALIFICATIor~S OF THE PLANT SAFETY CO:*:r.1JTTEE POSITIONS SHALL BE AS PRESENTED IN SECTION VIII - 1.5 OF THE SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT AS REVISED SEPTEMBER 19, 1974. H 7.1.2 PROCEDURES SHALL BE ~AINTAINED UNDER THE OVERALL DIRECTION OF THE G::ij~PJ.L ~~...~*:AGER COVERING THE:

7.1.2.1 PREPARATION. APPROVAL, AND ISSUANCE OF *ALL OPERATIr~r,

. nlSTRUCTIO::S A~-:O CHAi~GES THERETO, INCLUDING, BUT NOT BE LII~ITED TO: STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES. LmERS OF P.t!THORIZAT!v~I, RUHSHtETS,* SP:;CIAL ~!ORK PROCEDU~ES, AND ni:::~:~:::J ~::;~~ r;\OCE~ui\ES, ioiriC:~C: I~UC.L£AK \,;iH TICALITY OF RADIATION SArETY ARE CONSIDERATIONS.

7.1.2.2 INVESTIGATION OF ABNOR~lAL CONDITIONS h'HICH INVOLVE THE PROCESSH:G, HANDLING OR STORAGE OF RADIOACTIVE HATERIALS, AND WHICH AFFECT *NUCLEAR CRITICALITY OR RADIATION SAFETY..

7.1.2.3 ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN IN EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY INVOLVING RADIOACTIVE I/.ATERIAL. SUCH ACTIONS TO INCLUDE,* BUT NOT BE LUHTED TO: SHUTDo\,'N OF SPECIFIC EQUIpr~ENT., ACTIVATION OF

. THE EMERGENCY PLAN, S~~1MONING OF OUTSIDE SUPPORT. AND REENTRY TO THE ACCIDENT AREA. .

'7.1.2.4 PERFORI*1ANCE OF PERIODIC REVIE\*IS OF OPERATING PRACTICES. RECORDS AND AUDITS.

7.1.3 PLAUT O?ERATION. HEHBERS OF THE PR*ODUCTION OPERATING STAFF SI1.4ll H.~\,E A THROUGH KI\O!-:LEDr,E OF THE PROCEDURES GOVERNINr, THE \*!ORK FOR \*!HiCH THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE. [lRILLS SHALL BE HELD AT SUFFICIEfiT FREQUENCY TO ENSURE PROFICIENCY IN E/~ERr,ENCY PROCEDUi\ES. A CN:PLETE AND CURRENT SET OF OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES SHALL GE FRO\'I!:*:D Iil THE CO~TROL ROO~I AND Itl OTHER APPROPRIATE AREAS !*:HERE CO:;mOL FU:;CTIONS ARE PERFOR~IED.

(Change No. 22 Revision}

CHANGE H';. 23 UNITED STATf~ R. V. Curry NUCUI.A REQUlATOf:;V COMMISSION W. H. Lewia WAI"INCTON. D. C. 20111 ~ B. W. Brook H. J. NewmAn L. E. Mills JIJIt 1 J 1915 E. D. HQr**

SG:RRR N. A. Old:' ,

50-201' '. ~.~ "\-')' J. P. bu.ck.-c

~,."" J/J J R. 2'. Smo)cow Nuclear fuel Services, Inc. . G. E. Xitche De, ATTN: Mr.' J. R. Clarlc, Manager .

Enviror.:-.ental Protection A8

. and Liccnsin; Iy 6000 Executive Boulevard LV Suite 600

• Rod:vn let I'.!.rylar.tf 20952 //4

,.,'I.n" l ~ ~.

Gentlemen:-

We heve est8.blfshod that the attachments to 10m- lettel" of April 11.

1975. contain intonation of I type specified in 10 CRt 2.790{d).

Accon!1r.gly, the enclosures 1I'Q deaaed to be coaaercial or financial information within Uae lRaning of' 10 CFR 9.S{a)(4) and shall be sub-ject. to dis~lO$ure only in aCCOrdanc;e with ~ provisions of 10 CFR 9.12. For the $i1Qeretson we are vftlmolding Attachment I of tM en-closure to this letter.

Sincerel¥ *

.~ .'.

R. c. p:e:'--Act1ng Dfl'Ktor Dtv1s1on of safeguards

.-'~'

Enc;losU1"e: '.~~

. License Conditions f'~-

c~ w/o Atlat!=:ent I: atalva> .*

E Service List ..* .JUI 13 1915 1 a. QARK

• 0

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

\

!!IACw.~~.!rr

. 1 Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 7.90(d)

VALL£"{

~ ~

~'~

r'~;-,.

//.),

' - \ --..J ,

• \f.,'.:

j2~-

1121 , ,I

_  ; Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. Roc''::t. Ml!f~l.tnd * ::~~.

, ...... 1""\ i

- )  : A Suo: C;i!ry c~ Ge~y Oil Cc;~;a"'y i'_.J "

October 3, 1973 Mr. s. H. Smilej*, Depu ty Di rec tor Fuels and Materials Directorate of Licensing Office of Regulation U. S. Atomic Energy Conmission Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Hr. Smiley:

Your letter dated May 25, 1972, advised NFS th~t certain projects within the modification program being conducted at the NFS Reprocessing Plant would have to be considered by the USAEC under the provisions of 10 C.F.R. §50.91.

NFS is submitting today an Application for Appropriate Amendments to Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l. To enable a more effective evaluation of the entire modification program as a whole, NFS has included in this application not only the projects mentioned in your letter of May 25, 1972, but also the other portions of the modification program.

Table I-3-l of the Safety Analysis Report being submitted by NFS specifies, among other information, the licensing authori-za~ion that NFS will pursue for the various items within the modification program. '

As you will note, authorization. for the items desig~ated l{b), 2{c), and 3 are being requested under the construction permit to be issued pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §50.91. Since some of these items were the subject of requests for authorize,tion pre-viously submitted by NFS for USAEC review under 10 C.F.R. §50.59 and NFS is not oursuing such requests at this time, NFS hereby withdraws the following previous submissions to the USAEC:

Project Submission Date Process Ventilation Initial Request March 14, 1970 and I09ine Removal Supplement 1 August 31, 1970*

Supplement 2 December 30, 1971 Acid Recovery Initial Request March 14, 1970 System Supplement 1 August 31, 1970*

Supplement 2 December 30, 1971 Proprietary information previously withdrawn by NFS' letter dated July 18, 1972.  ;?ECEIVED I

. 'I ... - - ....

J J - I: I j J. p, DfJCiC /d;W!

---

_. ------------oq ~

Nuelear Fuel Services, Inc.

Mr. S. H. Smiley

• 112111 October 3, 1973 Page 2 Project Submis.sion Date 2nd Pu Cycle Initial Request November 5, 1971 Supplement 1 April 11, 1972 High Level Liquid Initial Request December 30, 1971 Waste storage Intercycle Initial Request April 21, 1972 Evaporators As you will also note, NFS intends to continue to seek authorization pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §50.59 for the only item designated in category 2(b), th~ FRS Cooler. Accordingly, NFS requests that the USAEC continue to review the NFS submission dated May 17, 1973, in connection with this item.

Very truly yours, a7!d~

J. R. Clark, Manager Environmental Protection and Licensing JRC/kac cc: Hon. James G. Cline, Chairman New York St.:;.te Atomic and Space Development Authority Maurice Axelrad, Esquire Newman, Reis & Axelrad INTERNAL DIST.:

Messrs. W. H. Lewis bcc: Mr. Thomas J. Cashman H. W. Brook New York State Department of W. A. Oldham

,Environmental Conservation .,;r: P.Duckworth Mr. Sherwood Davies New York State Department of Health Mr. T. K. DeBoer New York State Atomic Energy Council

~---.~----.----------------,--

I

• UNITED STATES ATOMIr; ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. lOS'5 DEC 1 3 1973 L:FFRB:EJF Docket 5(1-201 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. CJ.ark. Nanas:;er Environmental Protection and Licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Haryland 20852 and .. -.,. I DfC)" .. J New York Atomic and Space .. v;913 De'.Telopment Authority J .

ATTN: Mr. James Cline

• R. CLARk General Manager 230 Park Avenue New York, New York 10017 Gentlemen:

We have completed the pre-acceptance review of the NFS application, dated October 3. 1973, for amendments to Provisional Operating Lice~se No. CSF-l and found it to be acceptable. Accordingly, please submit 25 copies of the updated application, 70 copies of the SAR and 200 copies of the Environmental Report as soon as possible.

Notwithstanding our acceptance of the Safety Analysis Report and Environmental Report, our revie~1 has revealed that addition'll information is required to enable us to proceed with our evaluation in certain areas. A letter identifying this information will follow in a few days.

Your application does not indicate that a copy has been served on the appropriate local official in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.l0l(b) of the Co=ission's "Rules of Practice". Please forward a certification. complete with name and address of recipient, indicating that you have complied with this requirement.

RECEIVED DEC 20 1973 ,

!l. P. DUCKWORTH II

I

112045

/ A local public document room has been established at the Hemorial Libr&rj of Little Valley, Hain Street, Little Valley, New York. A copy of the application, and other relevant documents as they be-come available, will be on file for public inspection. It is requested that you have one of your representatives make periodic checks of the material available and assure that revised and supple-mental information is properly incorporated into the application and that any amendments, reports, and letters which you have filed with us are" available. We will send copies of documents you file with us to the local public document room.

Sincerely, L. C. Rouse, Chief Fuel Fabrication and Reprocessing Branch Directorate of Licensing

.f &~~l't? ~

Ic%sl

.c.;\"',,:,- I

• ,.~

Nuclear Fuel Services, 'nco A Subsidiary ot Getty Oil Company

• 11~UJI 6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 600, Rockville. :.Aarytand

• 20852 c

. .. ~.-

(301)710' 5510 Ralph W. Deusler "CIIOt,.,

December 13, 1973 Mr. S. H. Smiley Deputy Director Fuels & Material Directorate of Licensing Regulation U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Smiley:

Enclosed herewith in accordance with 10 CFR 50.30 are three signed original and 25 additional copies. of an application by Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) for amendments to Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l for the NFS ~vest Valley Reprocessing Facility.

Exhibits A and B were submitted by separate cover on October 3, 19~3. Further, 70 copies of the Safety Analysis Report and 200 copies of the Environmental R~port are being transmitted separately. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.l0l(b), copies of the application will be served on the County Clerk of Cattaraugus County, New York, and the Supervisor of the Town of Ashford, New York, and a certificate of service will be trans-mitted to the Commission under separate cover.

Very truly yours, 4£1u.~

Ralph W. Deuster RWD/bc Enclosures cc: Chairman James G. Cline N. Y. State Atomic and Space Development Authority Newman, Reis & Axelrad Washington, D. C.

RECEIVED DEC 21 1973

!l. P. DUCKWORTH

Before the U.

• ATOMIC ENERGY COl-IHISSIONe Washington, D. C. 112032 APPLICATION BY NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC.

FOR APPROPRIATE N.JENDr-IENTS TO PROVISIONAL OPER~TING LICENSE NO. CSF-l Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l pertaining to the nuclear fuel reprocessing facility (the "Facility") at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center (the "Site") at West Valley, New York, has been issued to Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. ("NFS") and the New York State Atomic and Space Development Authority ("ASDA").

License No. CSF-l, inter alia, authorizes possession, use, and opera-tion of the Facility as a production facility pursuant to 10 CFR SO~

In accordance with the AtomiC Energy Act of 1954, as amended, (the "Act") and of the regulations issued pursuant thereto by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission (the "commission"),Y NFS hereby applies for appropriate amendments, as set forth below, to License No. CSF-~ including whatever construction permit may be required under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.91.

The amendments bping sought by NFS would:

(a) authorize NFS to make certain modifications of the Facility described in the Safety Analysis Report (the "SAR") being submitted herewith; and (b) authorize operation of the Facility by NFS as so modified, for a term of forty years.

y By an order of the Atomic Energy Commission, dated November 13, .

1973, the Commission ruled that this application for amendment of NFS' existing Section l04.b license will be processed in accordance with the requirements of Section 103 of the Act and the Commission's regulations pertaining to applications for a license pursuant to Section 103. In compliance with such order, NFS will, in addition to complying with the req~irements applicable under Section 104.b, also comply with the requirements applicable under Section 103, including supplying the information required pursuant to Section 105 of the Act.

Background information pertaining to the filing of the 112033 current application is containe~- in the SAR, particularly Section 3 of Chapter I thereof. As set forth therein, the Commission has notified NFS that two of the proposed modifications of the Facility appear to be a "n:aterial alteration" and thus would have to be considered under the provisions of 10 CFR 5U.91, which requires the issuance of a construction permit, To enab:e a more effective evaluation of the entire modification program as a whole, NFS*

has included in this application not only the two foregoing modi-fications but also other portions of the program. Thus authoriza-tion to proceed with such other port~ons of the program wjuld be encompassed within the anticipated construction permit even though they do not require a construction permit. 2/

2/ It should, of course, be noted that some portions of the modification pLugram have already been initiated or completed or are curzently being reviewed by the Commission, all in accordance with applicable provisions of 10 CFR Part SO.

-Authorization to pro~eed with such modifications would thus not be encompassed wi thin the anticipated cOt.:;truction permit although such modifications would be taken into account in the Commission's review, which would pertain to the Facll~ty as modified by the entire modification program. The s~atus of the various pc.r.tions of the modification program and an indication of which portions of the modification program will be included in the construction permit and which will be or have been pursued under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 are set forth in the SAR, Table 1-3-1.

Although NFS has no present plans to do so, it may also deter-mine, at some future time, to withdraw one or more specific portions of the modification program from this application and seek their approval by the Co~~ission independently under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59. Nothing contained in this appli-cation should be deemed to prejudice such separate action if otherwise permitted under the Act and the Commission's regula-tions,

Since the F.lity has been operationa4tsince 1966 anJ.12034 the application pertains to modifications*of the existing Facility rather than to construction of a new facility, the information being supplied in the SAR and the Environmental Report submitted herewith is, in most instances, of the scope and quality that would be supplied in connection with an application for an operat-ing license rather than for a construction permit. Accordingly, although both documents insofar as they are not of final SAR quality will be updated by the time that the modification program is completed, it is not expected that a new application would have to be filed at that time.

In support of this application, NFS states the following:

1. Name Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

2. Address Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

Suite tiOO 6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryland 20852

3.

• Descriotion of Business

• NFS leases from ASDA the land constituting the 112035 Site and owns, in part, and leases, in part, and operates the Facility and related support systems to which this application pertains.

In addition to the Reprocessing Facility, NFS owns and operates a fuel preparation plant located at Erwin, Terinessee.

4. State of Incorporation and Principal Place of Business NFS is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Maryland with its corporate offices and principal place of business located at the address set forth in item 2., above.

5. Directors and Officers The names, addresses, positions, and the place of citizenship of all present directors and office=s are set forth below:

A. Directors Chairman J. Earle Gray Getty Oil Company 3810 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90010 United States Citizen

Ralph w~euster 112U36 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryland 20852 United States Citizen Director James E. Hara Skelly Oil Company 1437 South Boulder Avenue Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119 United States Citizen Director James Y. Haslam Skelly Oil Company 1437 South Boulder Avenue Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119 United States Citizen Director Jack D. Jones Getty Oil Company 3810 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90010 United States Citizen Director John P. McCabe Getty Oil Company 3810 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90010 United States Citizen

.ector Robert. Hiller 112U37 Skelly Oil Company 1437 South Boulder Avenue Tulsa, Oklahoma 74119 United States Citizen Director Sidney R. Petersen Getty Oil Company 3810 Wilshire Boulevartl Los Angeles, California 90010

.". United States Citizen B. Officers President Ralph W. Deuster Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryland 20852 United States Citizen Executive Vice Robert V. Curry President Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryland 20852 United States Citizen Vice President Charle~ W. Taylor Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryland 20852 United States Citizen

Vice President Wesley H. Lewis 11~UJ8 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryiand 20852 , '1 united States Citizen Secretary Henry W. Brook Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

6000 Executive Boulevard Rockville, Maryland 20852 united States Citizen Treasurer Hugh M. Slawson Getty Oil Company 3810 Wilshire Boulevard Los Angeles, California 90010 United States Citizen

6. Ownership and Control NFS has two stockholders, Getty Oil Company ("Getty")

which owns approximately 83.36% of the outstanding stock and Skelly Oil Company ("Skelly") which owns approximately 16.64% of the outstanding stock.

Neither of the foregoing companies is owned, con-trolled, or dominated by an alien, foreign corporation, or foreign government.

. r

7.

• Disclcsurc of Interests

• 112039

.. ~ ..

NFS is filing this application in its own behalf and is not acting as an agent or representative of any other party.

8. Class of License Applied For Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l was issued pursuant to Section 104.b of the Act. Pursuant to the Commission's order of November 13, 1973, the application for amendments being sought by NFS described above, includ-ing the construction permit to be issued under 10 CFR 50.91, will be processed by the Commission in accordance with the requirements of Section 103 of the Act and regulations 3/

pertinent thereto.- Such amendments issued by the Com-mission would thus satisfy the requirements of both sections 103 and 104.b of the Act.

9. Use of -the Facility Under License No. CSF-l, the Facility is used by NFS for the processing of fuel element~ and associated activities.

The Facility will continue to be used by NFS for the same purposes after issuance of the amendments requested herein.

Attached hereto and made a part hereof is the SAR, consist-ing of two volumes, and the Environmental Report, which con~ain the information with respect to the Facility and the Site required under the Commission's regulations.

l/ See n.l supra.

10.

Period of Time for Which License is Sought 11204U The amendments requested herein would convert Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l to a license for a term of 40 years.

11. Other Li;enses Issued or Applied For In addition to the license issued pursuant to Section 104.b of the Act and 10 CFR Part 50, Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l also grants certain by-

\

product, source and special nuclear material licenses pursuant to the Act anJ Parts 20, 30, 40, and 70 of the Commission's regulations. NFS hereby requests that such additional byproduct, source, and special nuclear materi~l licenses be issued as may be necessary and appropriate to the modification and operation of the Facility.

12. Financial Qualifications Exhibit ~ is an estimate of the costs of making the modifications to the Fa~ility described herein.

Exhibit B is a copy of NFS' balance sheet as of December 31, 1972, and of its Report of Operations and Statement of Retained Earnings and Capital Surplus for the year ending December 31, 1972.

1120~1 Exhibits A and B consist of i~formation which ~FS considers to be proprietary a~d public disc1osc=e thereof could place NFS at a disadvantage with respect to its competitors in conducting its bcsiness affairs. Accordingly, Exhibit A and B are being sub-mitted by separate cover letter, and pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790 NFS requests that Exhibit A and B be withheld from public disclosure.

NFS will finance the costs of the modifications througil inte=nal sources, including undistributed present and future earnings from operations of its facility at Erwin, Tennessee, from revenues for the continuing transpor1:ation to the Facility and storage of fuel elements and from advance receipt of revenues of repror.essing contracts to be performed in the future, and through external sources in the form of additional capital ~ontributions or loans from its parent companies, Getty and Skelly. Copies of Getty's and Skelly's 1972 Annual Reports are attached as Exhibits C ~nd D, respect~vely. With respect to the costs of the modification program, it should be noted that only 70% of the costs of such program remain tO,be incurred by NFS since it has already expended approximately 30% of the total flmds required for design and implementation of the program.

• 11~042

13. Earliest ar.d Latest Dates for Co~pletion of t-lodific.:: tio::s NFS esti~ates that the earliest date for co~pletion of the ~odifications described in this application

.is 24 months from the date of issuance of the con-struction permit and that the latest date for such completion is 48 months from such date of issuance.

14. Agreement Limitinq Access to Restricted Data NFS agrees that it will nut permit any individual to have access to Restricted Data until the ~ivil Service Commission shall have made an investigation and repor~ to the Commission on the character, asso-ciations and loyalty of such individual, and the Commission shali have determined that permitting such person to have access to Restricted Data will not endanger the common defense and Security.

15. Co~~unications All communications to NFS pertaining to this application should be sent to Mr. W. H. Lewis,

Vice President, Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.,

112043 6000 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, f.!aryland 20852, with a copy to Ne ....'I1\an, Reis, and Axelrad, 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N. W., Washington~ D. C.

20036 NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC. .

By Attachments State of Maryland, County of Montgomery:

I hereby certify that on the /.J~ day of ~1973, before me, the subscriber, a notary public of the State of Maryland, in and for Montgocery County, personally appeared Ralph W. Deuster and made oath in due form of law that the matters and facts set forth in the above application for appropriate amendments to Provisional Ooera~ina License No. CSF-l are true to the best of hiz knowledge: information and belief.

As witness, my hand and notarial seal.

.~

rJuc!ctir Fuel Services, fnc.

GOOO Exccutive 8ouIC'J:lrci. Sui:c GOO. Rockville. t,:Jr,'b1ej

• 2:~~:

_ )':':

1191, _ "4 (301) 770*5510 January 14, 1974 Mr. S. H. Smiley, Deputy Director Fuels and Materials Directorate of Licensing U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Office of Regulation lVashington, D. C. 20545

Dear Mr. Smiley:

Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. hereby submits for your review and approval a proposed change to Technical Specifi-cation 7.1 Administrative Requirements of License CSF-l.

~he intention of the proposed change is to:

a) formally establish the position of General Manager (previously titled Site Manng r) at the NFS reprocessing plant. The General Manager will coordinate the reprocessing plant activities described in our letters dated May 17, 1973 and June 20, 1973, as well as the construction activities whose approval is being sought in accordance with our application dated October 3, 1973; and b) limit the scope of the Technical Services Hanager's responsibility for nuclear safety reviews to those proposed changes whiCh are initiated at the plant and which are not be-ing pursued under the license amendment ap-plication dated October 3, 1973. Examples of his continued responsibility would include items designated as la.in Table 1-3-1 of the Safety Analysis Report which was included in the application of October 3, 1973.

The personnel staffing remains .as identified in our letter dated September 19, 1972.

It is NFS' intention to sometimes assign either the General Manager or the Pl~nt Manager to special activities being per[orlned under the license alnendrncnt application of October 3, 1973. At such times, the one not on special assignment will assume the dual position of General Manager/

Plant l*lan<.l,]er.

'.

• 119n2H Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

Nr. S. II. Smiley January 14,1974 Page 2

'. We believe that the proposed ch'lI,\ge improves the safety margin of some measures already approved by the Commission without decreasing any safety measure; therefore, NFS requests your earliest possible approval.

Very truly yours,

~&:::-

EnviroTh~ental and Licensing Protection JRC/kac Enclosure cc: Hon. James G. Cline, Chairman New York State Atomic and Space Development Authority New York, New York Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Region I King of Prussia, Pennsylvania bcc: Messrs. W. H. Lewis H. \'1. Brook W. A. Oldham

~~ P. Duckworth [5J

7.1 ADiHNIS'j'Ri'l'rIVE REQUIREi*iE"nS This spccificCltion establishes administrative standards for governing the operation of the facility.

Objective To assure that a management system responsive to the safety needs of the operation is established and main-tained.

Specific<ltion 7.1.1 ORGANIZIITION. FOR PUHI'OSES OF 11AINTAINING SAFE OPERi\TION lIND COXTlWL OF THE FACILITY i\ND OF ATTENDi\:-lT ACTIVITU:S, NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC. SHl\LI, PROVIDE I-1ANI,GEHENT OF THE PLANT THROUGH I,N ADHIN ISTR,'\T IVE FRi\}1El'lORK INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE FOLLOWING:

7.1.1.1 A GENERAL HANAGER, HAVINC OVERALL RESPONSIDI~ITIES FOR ALL ACTIVITIES AT THE PLfu'JT SITE.

7.1.1.2 A PLANT I-1ANAGER, REPORTING TO TIlE GENERAL I-lA~:AGER, DIRECTLY RESPONSIDL,E FOR ALL ACTIVITIES AT THE PLANT IN-VOLVING PRODUCTION, HEl\LTH [.ND SAFETY, NUCLE2\I{ SAFETY AND ADHERENCE TO THE LHIITS AND CONDI'rIONS SET FORTH IN THIS LICENSE.

7.1.1.3 AN OPEW,TIONS MANAGER, REPORTING TO THE PLM-iT I-lANAGER, RESPONSIDLE FOR CARRYIl\G OUT PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES IN ACCORDANCE InTH APPROVED PROCEDURES AND ACCEPTED HEALTH AND SAFETY STANDAPJJS.

7.1.1.4 II. HEI\LTlI I\ND SAFETY l-li\NI\GER, REPORTI NG TO THE PLI\1<T HANI\GER, RESPONSIBLE FOR MONI'l'ORING TIlE RADIOLOGICI\L Sl\FETY OF ALL PLlINT l\CTIVITIES AND FOR ADVISING ALL DEPl\l<.THENTS ON MDIOLOGICIIL SAFETY Ml\'rTERS.

7.1.1.5 II. TECIINICl\L SERVICES />1JI.Nl\GER, REPORTING TO TIlE PT],NT HAt.Ji\GER, RESPONSIBLE FOR II. CONTINUOUS REVIEloJ OF OPERiWIONS TO ASSURE NUCLEAR SAFETY.

(1/7!')

7.1.1. 6 l>. PLl~NT Sl\FETY C01*j~lITTEE RESPONSIBLE FOH: REVIEI'l l>.NO ,"\PPROVAL OF ALL STl\NOARD OPERi\TING PROCEDURES AND LETTERS OF AUTHORIZATION: REVIEI'l AND APPROVAL OF ALL CHANGES IN THE PROCESS, THE PROCESS SYSTEr-1, A/'iD STANDARD OPERi\TING PROCEDURES; INVESTIGATION OF ABNORHAL OCCURRENCES \\'HICI! HAY AFFECT RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY OR CRITICALITY PREVENTIONi l>.ND RECOMI-lENDATION OF MEASURES I'lHICH I'lILL PREVENT REPETITION OF SUCH ABNOru*l]\L OCCURRENCES. THE COf.!J!1!TTEE SH1"\LL CONSIST OF, BUT NOT BE LHlITED TO, THE PLANT MANAGER, THE TECHNICAL SERVICES t-1ANAGER, THE HEALTH AND SAFETY MANAGER AND 'I'HE OPERATIONS MANAGER.

(1/7 t1 )

CHANGE NO. 24 v,.'Tr;p $TA Tf:$

NUClEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

"",SHifleToH. D. C. iUu SG:RAA

,,'UrI 1 2 1975 50-201 Huclear Fuel Services! Inc.

ATTN: Hr. J. R. Clark, Manager

. EnvironmentAl Protect iOn and UcenstM

~~~ E~~cutlye aoul~yatd Stilte 600 Rockville. Maryland 20352 This is in response to your letter of June 6, 1975, whith requests a te!ipoi"ary exception to the reqlJirements of 10 CfR 73.50(b) for your We~t Valley facility.

~e have (:cnsHen.~ YCiJr request and the alterf'.3te means of protection you r.ave proposed. ~~ hav~ determined that the granting of a 1imited and t~~rary exception to the requirements of 10 eFR 13.50(b) is authOrized by 1aw !lnQ wl11 not- e,H.lange;- 1i fe Of' property Qr the coirmon defense and security and is ot,'lerwise in the publ it:: interest. Accord-ingly. C",,~?;~= :~_ 2? In Wi;: j~..ifiiical S~cHlcat1vns of LiceiiSi: wr--l is hei~l ~~i~ JJ i~;l~lng Settion 9.0 to add a new speciflcation 9.5 as fon~s:

9.5 Effective i~iately, the lltens~ 1s grdnted a temporary e,Y:ception for 45 days fros the requt rement of lO Cfft 73.50{b) willeh requires that vit.ll equijJnetlt be loeated only within a vital areO$ which. in turn~ shall be located within a protected area such that access to vital equip.

ment requires p;!ssage through at least two physical bar-riers. Th1s exception is granted provided that the licensee curnplies with the measureS proposed 1n his June 6. 1975, letter.

w~ hove establisr~d that your latter of June 6. 1975. contains informa~

tion of a type specified in 10 erR 2.790(d). Accordingly. the letter is rl~Jed to be Cl~;merciijl or financial information within the j;~a"tng of 10 ern 9.5(.1)(4) and sh~ll be subjt!(:t to disclosure only in accO}'dance with the provisiQn~ of 10 CFR 9.12.

Since.*ely.

~~

R. G. Page. Acting Director Oivision of Safeg!Jard~

cc: SerVlte List

CHANGE NO. 25 NUCL£AR REGU~ATOn Y CO ..'MISSION WASHINGTON. O. l;. JOSSS Cc - R'-S GCK JUt. 10 1975 SG:AAR ~~

50-201

,,-p,J Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

m;rl" Aim

Mr. J. R. Clark g~",aqer I e.G)¥'

Environmental Protection and Ucensing ifll 6000 £x~\lthe Soul evard Suft~ 600 ROckville. Maryland 20852 T~ t~t:..

Gentlemen:

Thi~ letter supplements our June 11. 1975 l~tt~r and its enclosure to take into account the revls10ns to your plan contained in your May 9. 1975 letter. Accordingly. we are fS$uinC) (;h~nge !lo. 2Sjn the Techni,al Specifications of License CSf-l pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(b). 10 CfR 50.1Q9 and 10 eFR 70.61(a) to revise License Cor~ition 9.1 to read as follow$:

9.1 The licensee sMn fOilo' the seturity plan entitled. "Physfcal Protection P19n~ West Vdl1~y Plant t Part 1, Revision 2~~ dated December 1974 as amended by Revision 3 and the enclosures to the licensee'" letter dat~ ~}' 9. 1975.

We have cst.}bltshed that the enclosures to your letter of ~.ay 9.

1975. contain info~t1on of a type specified in 10 eFR 2.790(d}.

kcordfngly, the enclosures are deemed to be cO;r:!!Crcial or financial information within the meaning of 10 eFR 9.5(a)(4) and shall be subject to disdosure only in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.12.

Since~elY7 I ~;Z;c.-

c:Rg~~ ~ VD1DS~C~' ~ '1-1 j{.~ctin9 Deputy Director Division of safeguards cc: Service List

~f~iU!&DCI"} ~y L/f~ /I (3' ISo A."..-...;prn> tzr C?~ 2~1 2 ~ 28

("CLOSURE Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

ATTACHnF!IT I Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

,. 0

CHANGE NO. 26 kCi.~

r *~~St UNITED STATES NU::LEAi\ REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SEP 7 1976 SGPS:OFS 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark, Manager Environmental Protection and Licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 600 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Gentlemen:

This responds to your letter of August 4, 1976 pertaining to your proposed relocation of your West Valley plant alarm stations.

We find your plan to relocate the alarm stations and the manning thereof, as described in enclosures A and B to your letter and as further discussed telephonically between your Mr. L. E. ~1i11s and Messrs. G. W. McCorkle and O. F. Smith of the NRC staff, to be acceptable. However, as the latest agreement is to extend the

!>r'otected are;:! b'!!"ri e!" to enco:r.pa$$ ~he primary alarm s i.dti on, pi ease forward, for our files, a corrected copy of attachment 2 to enclosure A of your August 4, 1976 letter that reflects this change.

As noted in your letter, this action constitutes a change to your West Valley Physical Security Plan. Accordingly, we are hereby issuing change No. 26 in the Technical Specifications of License CSF-1 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(b), 10 CFR 50.109 and 10 CFR 70.61(a) to cancel specification 9.4;- to revise specification 9.1; and to add specifications 9.3.9 and 9.3.10 as contained in the enclosure to this letter.

We have established that the enclosures to your letter of August 4, 1976 contain information of a type specified in 10 CFR 2.790(d).

Accordingly, those enclosures are deemed to be commercial or financial information within the meaning of 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4) and shall be subject to disclosure only in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.12.

Sincerely, 5vp~tf'O ~ y (1" "'"oz."1

/JAlo ~ I:Mrap /;/71 JO~~~

George W. McCorkle, Chief Physical Security Licensing Branch RFCElVED Divisi~n of Safeguards

Enclosure:

As stated 'SEP 1 3 j976

~jEN'_L M(lR.

NRC/SGPS Ltr dtd 9/l/i&

ENCLOSURE Docket No. 50-201 license CSF-l Change No. 26 Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

CHANGE NO. 27 lOY

• S 19'16 SGPS:OFS 50-2.01 RU(:l~r Fuel Serv1c~. Inc.

Am: Mr. J. R. Cla.rk. Manager Enviromenta 1 Proba(;tion Md li~$i"g 6000 Ex!(;utive Boulevard. Suite 500 Rlx:kvflle. Mai"ylAnd 20852 G!ntl~:

This res~ to yout" l~tW of SepteIIiIbB 22. 1916 wfth .nidi you 5ubat tted a COM"'ected copy of Attident 2 to Enclos"re A Of.YOUT AIl9ust 4. 1976 letter. .

We find ~ retOilfi9Ul"atioo of your WMt Yalley Plant protee-

~ ana to er..;~s.s the centTal alal'll station. as shawQ (JQ the ~rrected drawin~h to be acceptable. We are tberefor1!

~placing Attad-~t 2 to ~losijn! A of yOUl" August 4. 1976 i.t~" wi U. i..hi!i cnJ'1'6l~t~ "r')oI:i';I'I~. !n ~~!!" !~ effect this diar.9@. ~ are hereby tssuing d!!J\!J@ No. 2Z in t.~ T@dmical SpQeHf~tiOi1~ of lic@nse CSF-l pursu.b'lt to 10 CFR 50.30(b).

10 erR 50.109 and 10 eFR 70.61{a) to revise s~1fte4lt1on 9.1 4$ ~tairA!d in the enclosure to thii letter.

We MYe establ tshl!d t.t1at the er1Closure to your letter of Septeft)er 22. 1976 containi infomltion of a type specified in 10 CFR 2.790{d}. Ac~r'd11'i91y. that enclosure is deetne4 to ~ ~rcial or financial i"fOMfiiJtion within the Eaning of 10 CFR 9.S(a)(4) and shall be subject to disclO$ure Clnly in I.(:C(Ird~ wi th tM! pto'lis k>n$ of 10 (FA 9.12.

Sincenly.

Endcsure=

As it4ted R. V. Curry W. H. r....,is

)I. W. BrooJVR. J. N~~'mall

/V. A. Oldham/G. E. Kniqh J. R. Clark/A. C. Pierce Ori9inal to Legal F11e

Doeht No. SO-201 L1cense CS~*l Qlar~ Mo. Z7 9.1 The 1ft~~" shall follcw the se<:Urity plan entitled,

• PhYsital PrOtection Plan, Vest Valley Pla..'lt. Part I.

iIIIvfslon Z," ~ted December 1914 as atremled by* Revision 3~ sutzritted April 17. 19i5:o and the enr;lasures to the HCt1\S!@4S letter5 dated May 9. 1975:0 August 4, 1976 and Septe!¢er 22. 1916.

CHANGE NO. 28 Distribution:

• \

. R. V. Curry UNITED STATES ~. H. Lewis NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W. A. Oldham WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 G. E. Kitchen N. J. Newman J. R. ClarkiA. C. Pierce DEC Z'l 1976 Original to NRC Legal pt' SGPS:OFS 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark. Manager .

Environmental Protection and Licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard. Suite 600 Rockville. Maryland 20852 Gentlemen:

This responds to your letter of October 15. 1976 with which you

.' submitted a revised copy of page 1 of Enclosure A of your August 4.

1976 letter and a revised copy of Attachment 2 to Enclosure A of your September 22. 1976 letter.

We find the above-cited revisions to be acceptable. Accordingly.

we are making the appropriate page changes to the referenced documents. In order to effect this change. we are hereby issuing change No. 28 in the Technical Specifications of License CSF-l pursuant to 10 CFR SO.36{b). 10 CFR 50.109 and 10 CFR 70.61(a) to revise specification 9.1 as contained in the enclosure to this letter.

We have established that the enclosure to your letter of October 15.

1976 contains information of a type specified in 10 CFR 2.790(d).

Accordingly. that enclosure is deemed to be commercial or financial information within the meaning of 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4) and shall be subject to disclosure only in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.12.

Sincerely.

l~.~!e~

Physlca1 Security Licensing Branch Division of Safe~uards

Enclosure:

As stated RECEIVED JAN ..~ - 1977

~EN'L MGR.

NRC/SGPS Ltr dtd :rJEC 2 7 lSI

, /

ENCLOSURE Docket No. 50-201 License CSF-l Change No. 28 9.1 The licensee shall follow the security plan entitled,

• PhYsical Protection Plan, West Valley Plant, Part I, Revision 2," dated December 1974 as amended by Revision 3, submitted April 17, 1975. and the enclosures to the licensee's letters dated May 9, 1975. August 4, 1976, September 22, 1976, and October 15, 1976.

CHANGE NO. 29 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 SGPL: WCF AUG 141979

• 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark. Manager Quality Assurance and licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard. Suite 600 Rockville. Maryland 20850 Gent1 emen: .

This letter refers to the revised Safeguards Contingency Plan as submitted by letters of July 12 and 23. 1979. and to the revised Security Personnel Training and Qualification Plan for your West Valley facility as submitted by your letter of July 16. 1979. We have completed our review of both plans and find them to be acceptable.

In view of the fact that these plans along with the existing Physical Security Plan comprise essential elements of your physical protection program. we find it appropriate to incorporate all of the plans into your license by issuing a change in the Technical Specification of the license. Therefore, we are hereby issuing Change No. 29 to the Technical Specification of license CSF-1 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36(b), 10 CFR 50.109 and 10 CFR 70.61(a) to revise spec-ifications 9.1 and 9.2 as set forth in the enclosure to this letter. Specifica-tion 9.1.B is effective 30 days after receipt of this letter; specification 9.1.C is effective 60 days after receipt of this 1etter~ Specification 9.2 is administratively revised to r~flect the changes in 9.1. .

It has been determined that the enclosure to your letters of July 12, 16, and 23, 1979 all contain information of a type specified in 10 CFR 2.790(d). Accord-ingly, the enclosures are deemed to be commercial or financial information within the meaning of 10 CFR 9.5(a)(4) and shall be subject to disclosure only in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.12.

Sincerely.

J;}1! IV. ;<<{//.r.<.

Geo~e W. HcCorkl e, Ch\e~

Physical Security licensing Branch

Enclosure:

As stated RECEIVED AUG 20 1979 GEN'L MGR.

Docket No. 50-201 License No. CSF-l MPP-1 Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

UNITED STATES  !.JHL NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION r.JI!.:> ... '"

WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 I/~';

~i:k HOV 3 0 1971 SGPS:RLH 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

AnN: 11r. J. R. Clark, r*1anager Quality Assurance and Licensing 6000 Executive Boulevard, Suite 600 Rockville, Md. 20852 Gentlemen:

We have revie\'led reV1Sl0n 5 to your document, ":Iuclear Fuel Services, Inc., ~!est Valley, ile\'1 York, Physical Protection Plan," dated Novemb2r 1976, which was submitted as an enclosure to your letter dated January "14,1977. \'!e have determined that this revision is acceptable and have noted that it includes commitments to meet several of the re-quirements contained in current technical specifications. Accordingly, we are deleting in their entirety technical specifications 9.3.2.

9.3.4, 9.3.5, 9.3.7 and 9.3.8. We are also revising technical speci-fications 9.3.9, 9.3.10 and 9.4.1 to reflect the parts of those specifications which are incorporated into revision 5 of your plan.

In addition, I'le are revising technical specification 9.3.3 to simpl i fy the statement of the requirement.

We are restructuring the exceptions portion of the technical specifi-cations to your license ~y adding a general condition 9.4 and by adding the specific condition 9.4.2 to allow cleared OOE/ERD.\ couriers accompanyi ng s hi pments to be excepted from the requi rements for sea rch stipulated in 10 CFR Part 73.50(c)(1).

In accordance with the foregoing determinations, I'le are hereby reissuing Section 9 of Physical Security Requirements to your License No. CSF-l as contained in the enclosure to this letter, effective immediately.

\~e have determined that the enclosure to your letter dated January 14,1977 contains information of a type specified in 10 CFR 2.790(d).

RECEIVED DEC !:J - 19n GEN" '10&

Accordingly, it is deemed to be cOlTlTlercial or finandal information within the meaning of 10CFR 9.5(a)(4) and shall be subject to dis-closure only in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 9.12. For the same reason we are withholding Appendix A of the enclosure to thi s 1etter.

,i, /uJi~.

Geo:,=-:~. r.1cCork1e, Chief Physical Security Licensing 3ranch

Enclosure:

As stated

NOV a 0 1977 Docket No. 50-201 Page 1 of 4 Pages License No. CSF-l Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

Docket No. 50-201 Page 2 of 4 Pages License No. CSF-1 Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

Docket ~Io. 50-201 Page 3 of 4 Pages License No. CSF-l Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

Docket No. 50-201 Page 4 of 4 Pages License No. CSF-1 Information withheld pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d)

CHANGE NO. 30

---:O'I--C ;-r;.- ~nCHU-UNITED ST','U rIOH: J,.,~~. CLAU NIJCl.fAR-REGULATORY COMMISSION

---

~ ... ------ - --.--- --- -*---~*--*-.c"~4 SQL:OFS

/ .so.201 JIUclear fuel SerrlCC8, IllC *

.A:nB: :IIr. J. L Clark. KanaPT QuAlity Asauranee ud llieasins 6000 hec:utive Boulevard. SQite 600 Iockrllle, BarylDd 20M0 eeotlatnl 1'his lettn fOT1Dllli~1(t5 oat' Aci:~une~ of several changes in the l'bY5ical protec:tian -.asuT9 caa.i.t;t.~ t6 u your aite. The" ebang4UJ. whi<<:h ;ant rcflccl;ed hi 2-..,,181008 6 and 7 of yovr l't\Y$ic::al PTotcctioa Plad, ha"e heeD id_e1l1ed ftspec:Uve1y 88 1dncn ehomga.; mid .:ufminiPtuuJ.ve r:haA~ and aTe deeM4 DOt to 4ccrl:ase t:l:e et.feeeivecesa of your plan. ~Tdugly. we are hereby 1 30 to Ie: Spee:ification 0 License CSJ-punoomt to 10 e n 5O.36(h). 1 .. to Tm$1L 8P8C1f~tiOll 9.1.A ;as fDllOlfS:

9;1... The licensee shall. lollow t.be security pIn enti~l~.

luclear Fuel Servicn_ inc. ~ Vart valler, 11ft YO~t.

I'hvakal. Pro.tection Plan lev. 6 dated Ck~er 1979.

..' re'rlsed"-bY. ~:; 7 uted lbrch 19ao~' aad as 8.eaded

~t ~Q t.he-~"d.iausorur~'i-5Cl.S<<.'*Jaii4 70.)2(.). . .

It be. keD ch~tendnec1 that the eaclocare to yoUr letters of I<rveaber 2, 1919 sod Kstth 20. 1980 all contain iufolWltioa of a type 8{>ee:1f:1ed 1D 10 en 2.790. Cd).

kcord1n&ly. tbe eoclosvTe. ;an ~ I;D he ctIiiIiiercl&l or finaadal info~t.iOD vttbiD the JllMftiDg Df 10 en 9.5(1I)(4) aDd abal.1 be subject to clt.&elosura ODly 14 ac:c:oE~e vitb tbe "ron.tone of 10 en '.12-.

S1Jlcere1y. .

-,£;~; Irlft GCfJT"-:W. JlcCodie, Chie

~5i~l--£cc:ud*t'JLkcn:fin.-k-er.dt~-------

D1V'U1OD of S4.f~~.. liMS5

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D. C.20555 JUN 18 1981

" Docket No. 50-201 Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.

ATTN: Mr. J. R. Clark, Manager Quality Assurance and Licensing 6000 Executive Blvd. .

Rockville, Maryland 20850 Gentlemen:

On February 27, 1981, Revision Nos. 6 and 7 of your Physical Protection Plan were approved and incorporated into License CSF-l by Change No. 30 to the Technical Specifications. The approvals were issued in response to your November 2, 1979, and March 20, 1980 applications *. A $150 fee was submitted for the March 20, 1980 application.

The cost for reviewing the revisions was determined in accordance with fee Category F (Special projects and reviews) and Footnote 4 of Section 170.21 of the enclosed 10 CFR 170. The total cost of the reviews amounted to $1,995; based on an expenditure of 52.5 man-hours @ $38/man-hour. We have notified the NRC Office of the Controller to issue your Company an invoice for $1,845

($1,995 fee due less $150 remitted for the March 1980 submittal).

If you have any questions concerning this matter, please let us know.

Sincerely,

Enclosure:

10 CFR 170

CHANGE NO. 31 I '

UNITID ITATU

- 7 ,~

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WAlHINGTON, D. C. 20lIl RECE!VED

( NY~

'0 SEP 1981 ENEP.~. "fleE 0;'; _ ;"."~"'" -:) of

.*-. f~yl Docket No. 50-201

~SAI'ff. N. Y..

Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Ralph W. Deuster. President FILE COH' .

6000 Executive Boulevard. Suite 600 Change No. 31 Rockville. MD 20852 FacfHty License No. CSF-1 Gentlemen:

This is an amendment (Change No. 31) to facility License"No. CSF-1. together with a copy of a notice. concerning this lIIendment. which. has been submitted for publication in the Federal Register. This amendment is fssued fn response to the application filed on August 19. 1981. by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. joined by the U.S. Department of Energy.

In accordance with paragraph C(2) of new Condition 7. of the amended license. we propose to appropriately amend Indemnity Agreement B-29 as of the time of the transfer of the facility to the Department of Energy. We antiCipate execution of an amendment to the indemnity agreement at that time~

Accordingly. pursuant to 10 CFR 150.91 new Condition 7. to the lfcense. as shown in enclosure 1. is authorized.

In acting upon the request for an iIII1enclment. we have carefully considered the views expressed in your letters of September 11. 1981 and September 25.

1981. You may. of course. request a hearing with respect to this action in accordance with Section 189a. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. as amended.

Sincerely.

~C/~

Leland C. Rouse. Chief Advanced Fuel and Spent Fuel Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Materi-al Safety Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosures:

1. New License Co~dition 7.

2. Federal Refister Notice

3. Safety Eva uat10n cc: Mr. James Larocca. NYSERDA

7. The licensees, as their respective interests under this licens_ appear, may transfer the facility to the United States Department of Energy (AOOEA) in accordance with the West Valley Demonstration Project Act (AProject ActA), Pub. L. No.96-368, subject to thefollowfng condi ti ons:

A. DOE shall assume exclusive possession of the facility and shall continue in possession until such time as the lfcensees, as their respective interests under this license appear, reacquire the facility.

B. (1) Commencing on the date of transfer of the facilfty to DOE, and continuing until DOE surrenders possession thereof:

a. Neither licensee shall be authorized to possess, use, or operate, or be responsible for .. intenance, surveillance, or safeguarding of the facilfty under this lfcensei and to the extent that either lfcensee retains any right, title, or interest in any property located. at the facility or any interest or responsibilfty under this license, ft fs not authorized to take or permit, and shall ~ot take or permit, any action which fn DOE's judgment may inhibit or prevent DOE from taking any action under the Atomic Energy Act or the Project Act:

(i) to carry out its activities pursuant to the Project Acti (ii) to guard against the loss or diversion of any special nuclear material located at the facilitYi (iii) to prevent any use of or disposition of any special nuclear material located at the facilfty which DOE may determine to be fnimical to the common defense and sec uri ty i or (fv) to protect health or .inimize danger to life or property.

b. Neither licensee shall have further responsib11fty under subparagraph 5 (B) or eC) of this lfcense to develop, maintain, or submit records or reports pertafning to events occurring or conditions prevailing at the facility during the time the facilfty fs fn ~OE's possessioni (2) Commencing on the date of transfer of the facility, the technical specifications referenced in subparagraph SeA) of this license, and the conditions contained in the amendment to this license for special nuclear materials safeguards, shall be held in abeyance.

C. (1) DOE will contract with a person or persons to perform services for the benefit of the United States, subject to the direction and 30 S£P *1981

supervision of DOE, such contractual activity to include the conduct of the West Valley Demonstration Project (-Project-) and such other services as -.y be needed in connection with the transferred facility frca the ti.e of the transfer and for so long thereafter as such facili~ is in the possession of DOE, and DOE will enter into agreements of indemnification with such person or persons in accordance with section 170d. of the AtOllic Energy Act.

(2) Effective as of the time of transfer of thefacili~ to DOE, and until DOE surrenders possession of the facility, Indemni~ Agreement No. B-29 shall be suspended. Such suspension shall be evidenced by an amendment to said Ino..ni~ Agreement which provides that the agreement shall not include the period of suspension described in the preceding sentence, and that the suspension shall not affect any obligation of the parties to the agreement wi-th respect to any nuclear incident occurring prior to the suspension.

D. Except as provided in subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) of this paragraph 7, the responsibilities of the licensees under this license, as their respective interests under this license appear, shall continue in effect, provided that neither licensee is authorized to take or permit, and shall not take or permit (to the extent it has legal authority to do so) a.ny other person to take, any action which in DOE s judgment may inhibit or prevent DOE from taki ng any action under I

the Atomic Energy Act or the Project Act:

(1) to carry out its activities pursuant to the Project Act; (2) to guard against the loss or diversion of any special nuclear material located at the facility; (3) to prevent any use of or disposition of any special nuclear material located at the facility which DOE may determine to be inimical to the cOlllDon defense and security; or (4) to protect health or .1n1m1ze danger to life or property.

E. The licensees, as their respective interests under this license appear, shall:

(1) reacquire and possess the facility upon completion of the Project, in accordance with such technical specifications and subject to such other provisions as the Commission finds necessary and proper under the Atomic Energy Act and Commission regulations; and (2) make t1mely submissions to the Commission, in anticipation of completion of the Project, as may be required by the Commission to determine such technical specifications and other provisions.

a 0 SEP iSS;

7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-201 NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES. INC. AND 0" .....

NEW YORK STATE ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY

'.' (WESTERN NEW YORK NUCLEAR SERVICE CENTER)

ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. CSF-I Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. and New York State Energy Research and

-

t-Development Authority (as successor to the New York State Atomic and Space Development Authority) hold Provisional Operating License No. CSF-I. The license, issued under section .lD4b. of the Atomic Energy Act, authorizes operation of a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive waste disposal facility at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center in West Valley, New York (the Center).

Under the West Valley Demonstration Project Act, Pub. L.96-368, (the West Valley Act), the Department of Energy has been authorized to carry out a high level radioactive waste management demonstratiori project at the Center for the purpose of demonstrating solidifiea~ion techniques which can be used for preparing high level liquid radioactive waste for disposal.

On August 19. 1981 the COimission received an application for amendment of Faci1 ity License No. CSF-1 to authorize transfer of the facility to the Department of Energy. As provfded by the West Valley Act. the app1icatfon was submi tted by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authori ty.

joined by the Department of Energy. Notice of recefpt of the app1fcatfon was published fn the FEDERAL REGISTER on September 2. 1981 (46 FR 44110).

In accordance with 10 CFR 12.106. notice fs hereby given that the Commission has today issued an amendment to License No. CSF-1 authorizfng the co-licensees. as their respective fnterests under the license appear. to transfer the facility to the Department of Energy in accordance with the West Valley Act.

The Commission has determined that the application for the amendment comp1fes with the requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and the regulations of the Commission (10 CFR Chapter I). The Commission has determined that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. Copies of the amendment to the license and the NRC staff's safety evaluation are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room. 1717 H Street. N.W ** Washington. D.C. and at the Local Public Document Rooms maintained at the Buffalo and Erie County Public Library. Lafayette Square. Buffalo, New York; and the Town of Concord Public Lfbrary. 23 North Buffalo Street. Sprfngvi11e. New York.

Dated at Silver Spring. Maryland. thfs 30U( day of"it.~~, 1981.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

~JC.~

Leland C. Rouse. Chief Advanced*Fuel and Spent Fuel Licensfng Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety

U.S. NUCLEAR REGUUTORY CCM4ISSION I,

SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 31 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE CSF-1 DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE AND MATERIAL SAFETY SEPTEMBER 1981 I. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION I ntroducti on The West Valley Demonstration Project Act of'l980 (the Act), Public Law No.96-368, authorized the Department of Energy to carry out a high-level liquid nuclear waste management project at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center (the Center) in West Valley, New York. In accordance with Section 2(b)(4)(A) of the Act, the State of New York *will make available to the Secretary (of the Department of Energy] the facilities of the Center and the high level radioactive waste at the Center which are necessary for the completion of the project."

In addition, the Department of Energy and the State of New York were required (Sec. 2(b)(4)(D)] to submit an application jointly for a licensing amendment as soon as pOSSible with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission providing for the demonstration.

On August 14, 1981 the Energy Research and Development Authority (ERDA) of the State of New York, joined by the U.S. Department of Energy (DO'E), submitted an application for amendment of Facfli~ License No. CSF-1 to provide for the West Valley Demonstration Project Act at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center.

f i "

Consideration of Criteria

• AS provided by 10 CFR § 50.91, the U.S. Nuclear Regulato~ Commission (the commission) determines, bef~re acting thereon, whether a proposed amendment to a facility license involves a significant hazards* consideration. In making this determination, it is appropriate to consider whether operation of the faci 1i ty woul d (1) i nvol ve a si gnificant increase in the probabl1 i ty of consequences of an accident previously evaluated, (Z) create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously, or (3) involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety. If the Conmission reaches a negative conclusion on all criteria set forth in (1),(2), and (3) above, the proposed amendment may be considered to involve no significant hazards consideration.

It should be noted, first, that the proposed amendment would authorize transfer of the facility, but not operation of the facility by DOE (which is exempt from licensing). Therefore, there is no need to evaluate the hazards associated with operation during the period when the facility is in DOE's possession and control. This conclusion is consistent with the provisions in Section Z(c) of the Act that Commission review with respect to the project shall not include formal licensing procedures under the Atom; c Energy Act.

(

Each of the three criteria above may first be considered in relation to the period when the facility is in the possession of DOE. During that time, the licensees are not authorized to take any action under the license.

All activities will be conducted by DOE. Since no activities will be taken under the authority granted by the license, no type of accident could occur as I result of licensed activities. Therefore, with respect to the period of license suspension during which DOE will be in possession of the facility, all three of the above criteria are met and the proposed amendment may be considered to involve no significant hazards consideration.

Upon resumption of activities under the license, following completion of the project by the Department of Energy in conformance with the Act, the most important safety-related aspect at the site, ~e continued care of the liquid high-level waste, will no longer exist. As set forth in the Act in Section 2(a),

thehigh-'evel waste will have been solidified fn containers suitable for permanent disposal and transported to a Federal repository for permanent disposal. At least parts of the facility will have been decontaminated and decommissioned by the Department of Energy.

Again considering the criteria stated above, (1) there will be a decrease in the probability or consequences of the accidents previously evaluated (there will be no possibility for an accident involving liquid high-level waste) ,(2) there will be no possibility of creating a type of accident different from those presently evaluated because the project facilities will have been decontaminated and decommissioned, and (3) the margins of safety would have been increased, rather than reduced, since the liquid high-level waste would no longer require management.

Therefore, upon resumption of the license the thr!!_~riteria are met and the proposed amendment may be considered to*involve no significant hazards consideration.

The staff also has consi der:-ed Paragraph 7.E. (2) of the 11 cense lIDendlJlent, which states that -the licensees, 1$ their respective interests under this license appear, shall ***

-(2) make timely submissions to the Commission, in antiCipation of the completion of the project, IS .ay be require4 by the Commission to determine such technical specifications and their provisions.-

By this provision the staff has assured that prior to the reacquisition of the site all safe.ty- concerns will have been considered and properly evaluated for the protection of the health and safety of the public.

Conclusions Based on the above discussion, the staff has concluded that the issuance of Amendment No. 31 to Facility License No. CSF-l involves no significant hazards consideration.

II. FURTHER FINDINGS In accordance with 10 CFR 150.91. the staff further concludes that the issuance of the license amendment will not be inimicil to the common defense and security or to.the health and safety of the public. In arriving at this conclusion. the staff has taken into consideration, in addition to the evaluation above, the license amendment provision which expressly constrains the licensee from taking any actions which in DOE's judgment may inhibit or prevent DOE from discharging safety and security responsibility.

i

"\

- 'S -

f In accordance with 10 CFR § 51.5(d)(4). no environmental report. environ-mental impact appraisal or assessment. negative declaration or finding of no signficant flllpact or envirolllental i.pact statement is required with respect to the fssuance of the license amendment.

CHANGE NO. 32 RECEIVED UNITED STArES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMI5SIf;N IIYS ENERGY OFFICE IWMUIfllGTON. D. Co ~

FEB 11 1982 ~rR 1 6 f982 "1", -~.~ ...." .. ;'-'. ;:" . ~.

Docket No. 50-201 Chan9~ ?,!I). JZ AlBANY, N.Y. 12223 Facility Lte~ns~ ~o. CSF-l Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc.

ATTN: Mr. Ralph W. Deuster. Presid,nt 6000 Executive Boulevard. Suit6600 Rockville. MD 20852 New York State Energy Research and f'~2$; -1:.£ .

Development Authority ATTN: Mr. James Larocca. Chainnan , File _§:'- "~::;:- a Agency Building No.2. Empire State Plaza FU_*_ _...;...O Albany. New York 12223 Gentlemen:

Please find enclosed an ..endment (Change No. '32) to Faci1i~ If(2illie

... No. CSF-l. together with a copy of'anotice conc(l!~nil'lg ~h ~nlkl~llt.

which has been submitted for pu~1fcation in the .~ederal ~Ji1ster. lind the NRC staff's safety evaluation related to this licensing ,~(;don. 'ffih amendment is being issued. pursuant to 10 CFR ~G.9l. in ~e~por.~~ to t~e app.1ication filed by Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc. on februaFI 1. 1982 and the letter of the New York State Energy ResearclJ and o.velopment Authority dated February 9. 1982 with respect thereto. The .endment incorporates the specific text proposed by the New York State Energ] Research and Development Authori~ and agreed to by Nuclear Fuel Services. inc.

Accordingly. pursuant to 10 CFR EO.91, License No. CSF-l is ..ended. IS shown in Enclosure 1. to include new paragraph 8.. .

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULA'TtlRY C()1M!SSWl'l

/" . //

~~*C ~~( .~. .

Leland C. Rouse, Chief ., '." -1',' -'. _

Advanced Fuel and Spent fuel Licensing Branch .

Division of Fuel Cycle anc Material Safety Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

Enclosures:

1. New License Condition 8.

2. Federal Re¥ister Notice

3. safety Eva uation

~

f '. 1 8.A. Effective upon (1) acceptance of surrender of the facility by the New York State Energy Research and DevelOpllent Authority (-NYSERDA B ) from NFS; (2) DOE's assumption of exclusive possession of the facfli~ in accordance with Para-graph 7; and (3) the Settletnent Date '-Settletnent Date-) of a Settlement Agreement, Stipulation and Order fn Civil Actions No.81-18E and 81-683E in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York (-Settlement Agreeme~t-) :

a. The authority and respons'bi11~ of NFS under the lfcense are tennfnated. Notwithstanding such tet"llination. NFS shall promptly transfer to NYSERDA all records in the possession of NFS that are maintained pursuant to the license that have not been previously transferred to DOE.

b. All references in Paragraph 7 to -licensee.- *licensees,*

• licensees under this license, as their respective fnter-ests under this license appear.- or -licensees as their respective interests under this license appear- shall thereafter refer exclusively to NYSERDA. .

o. c. Indemnity Agreement No. B-29 shall be ~d1fied to conform to the change in the,uthority and responsibl1 i~ described in subparagraphs a and b of this Paragraph 8.A.

B. NFS and NYSERDA shall jointly file with the Commission, as soon

. as practi cab 1e, a copy of any Settl ement Agreement and notice of acceptance of the facility by NYSERDA; and NYSERDA shall file with the Commission, as soon as practicable. notice of DOE's assumption of exclusive possession of the facility in accordance with Paragraph 7.

C. As soon as practicable, NFS and NYSERDA shall gtve the Commission notice of specific date. by month, day. and year; that constitutes the Settlement Date.

FEB 11 1992*

7590-01

\

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET NO. 50-201 NUCLEAR FUEL SERVICES, INC. AND NEW YORK STATE ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (WESTERN NEW YORK NUCLEAR SERVICE CENTER)

ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. CSF-1 Nucleor Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (as succ~s~or to the New York State Atomic and Space Development Authority) (tfle'Authority) hold Provisional Operating License No. CSF-l. The license, issued under section 104b. of the Atomic Energy Act, had authorized the operation of a spent nuclear fuel reprocessing and radioactive waste disposal facility at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center in West Valley, New York (the. Center).

Under the West Valley Demonstration Project Act, Pub. L.96-368, the Department of Energy has been authorized to carry out a high-level radioactive

.. . waste management demonstration project at the Center for the.

purpose of demonstrating solidification techniques which can be used for preparing high-level liquid radioactive waste for disposal.

On September 30, 1981, the U.S. Nuclear Regulato~ Commission (the Commission) issued an amendment to the license which NOuld permit transfer of the facility to the Department of Energy for purposes of the project (46 FR 49237).

,f tJ.

f On October 6, 198.1, the COIIIIIission received from NFS an application for amendment of License No. CSF-1 to relieve NFS of all operational responsibility under the license. Notice of receipt of this application was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on November 13, 1981 (46 FR 56086).

The Commission denied the app1fcation on January 11, 1981, without prejudice, in order tc .avoid adjudication before the ConIIission of issues of law and fact.that are being litigated between NFS and the Authority in the federal court system.

NFS submitted a further application to the Commission on February I, 1982. The new application requests that the authority and responsibility

.. of NFS under the license be terminated upon the occurrence of certain

.~

events. A supporting letter, dated February 9, 1982, was filed by the

. Authority. The Department of Energy, by letter of February 10, 1982, advised the Commission that it has no objection to the issuance of the requested amendment.

In accordance with 10 CFR §2.106,notfce is hereby given that the Commission has today issued an' amendment to L1cen*se No. CSF-1, substantially as requested by NFS, which provides for termination of the authority and pesponsibility of NFS under said license, effective upon 1) acceptance of surrender of the facility by the Authority from NFS. 2) DOE's assumption of exclusive possession of the facility, and 3) the Settlement Date of a

Settlement Agreement in pending civil actions in the United States District Court for the Western District of New York. The Commission has determined that the application for the amendment complies with the requirements of I

• the Atomic Energy Act and the regulations of the Commission (10 CFR Chapter I).

The Commission has determined that this amendment involves no significant hazards consideration. Copies of the amendment to the Hcenseand the NRC staff's safety evaluation are available for public inspection at the Commi ssfon's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington. D.C.

and at the*Local Public Document Rooms maintained at the Buffalo and Erie

... County Public Library. Lafayette ~quare, Buffalo, New York; and the Town of

~

Concord Public Library. 23 North Buffalo Street. Springville, New York.

, Dated at Silver Spring, Maryland, this /I~ day of 7JJ..,.-.....'7J 1982.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSlm,

~C.C. t:~

Leland C. Rouse, Chief Advanced Fuel and Spe~t Fuel Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety

j' f

u.s. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

• I SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT RELATED TO AMENDMENT NO. 32 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE CSF-l DIVISION OF FUEL CYCLE AND MATERIAL SAFETY FEBRUARY 1982 I. FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION Introduciion Paragraph 4.A. of License No. CSF-1 provides that in the event of any expiration. modification. cancellation. or tennination of the contractual arrangement between Nuclear Fuel Services. Inc. (NFS) and the New York State Energy Research and Devel~pment Authority (NYSERDA)lI or any other change in the relationship between them. including any proposed transfer from NFS to NYSERDA of responsibility for the operation and care of those portions of the facility in which the storage and burial of radioactive wastes will take place. NFS or NYSERDA may apply to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) for an approp~iate amendment of this license reflecting the future responsibilities of .NFS and NYSERDA with respect to satisfying Commission regulatory requirements.

NFS and NYSERDA have agreed. subject to the occurrence of certain contingencies.

to terminate the contractual agreement between them and have propo!~d to transfer from NFS to NYSERDA. in the event of such termination. responsibili~

for the operation and care of the facility following the completion of 1I

-f The New York 'State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) is successor to the Atomic and Space Development Authority (ASDA). the agency which is named in License No. CSF-1.

r*

• j I

high-level waste solidification by the Department of Energy. To reflect this change in responsibility. the Commission proposes to -adify the license by terminating the luthority and responsibili~ of NFS upon DOE assuming exclusive possession and control of the fac11i~ as provided in paragraph 7. of License CSF-1. as .-ended. and the occurrence of the contingencies referred to above.

Consideration of Criteria As provided by 10 eFR s 50.91. the U.S. Nuclear Regullto~ Commiss' In (the Commission) determines. before acting thereon. whether a proposed amendment

.. to a facility license involves a significant hazards consideration. In

~

making this determination. it is appropriate to consider whether operation of the facility would (1) involve a significant increase in the probability of consequences of an accident previously evaluated. (2) create the possibility of an accident of a type different from any evaluated previously.

or (3) involve a significant reduction in a ..rgin of safety. If the Commission reaches a negative conclusion on all criteria set forth in (1). (2). and (3) above. the proposed amendment may be considered to involve "

no significant hazards consideration.

It should be noted. first. that the previous Amendment (Change No. 31) authorized transfer of the facility to DOE. Because DOE is exempt from Commission licensing. there is no need to evaluate any hazard associated with operation during the period when the fac1l1~ is in DOE's possession

/

(

and control. 2/ Whereas the license previously suspended the rights and responsibiUties of NFS during the period of DOE possession and control, the proposed license modification WDuld terminate NFS's authority and responsibility.

The authority and responsibility of ~YSERDA would continue to be suspended

• During this period, all three of the above criteria are !let and the proposed license modification lIay be considered to involve no significant hazards consi deration.

Having made this determination, it is appropriate to consider whether, when DOE completes the West Valley Demonstration Project and NYSERDA reacqufres the

.. facility, fts operation would fnvol've a signfficant increase in the probability or consequences of an accfdent previously eval uated. Two factors infl uence the, probability or consequences of an accfdent. They are the radiological risk fnherent fn conditions at the facility, and the ability of the facility operator to prevent accidents or to mitigate their consequences.

Upon resumption of activities under the license following completion of the West Vall ey Demonstration Project by DOE, the IIOst important safety-related aspe~t at the site, the continued care of the lfqufd high-level waste, will' no longer exist. It will have been solidified and transported to a Federal repository for permanent disposal. At least part of the facflfiy will have been decontaminated and decommissioned by DOE in accordance wfth such requirements as the Commission may prescribe. The inherent risk associated with conditfons at the site will have been reduced accordingly.

J2' The Commission is required, however, to conduct an infonnal- review and consultation with respect to the project pursuant' to arrangements with DOE. Pub. L.96-368, 94 Stat. 1347, 12(c). SUch arrangements have been established by means of a Memorandum of Understanding, effective September 23, 1981. 45 FR 56960, November 19, 1981.

I If I - *

~l The proposed license modfffcatfon would terminate NFS as the facility operator without changing the authorization of NYSERDA to hold title to the facfl_ity. *NYSERDA is .not currently licensed to operate the facn i ty nor would ft be under the proposed 11e>diffcatfon. Whether a licensed operator possessing the requisite ffnancfal and technfc11 qualifications wtll be necessary when NYSERDA, or fts successor, reacquires the facflfty cannot* be determined now.

It is clear that upon CClllpl.etfon of the West Yalle.v O.Onstration Project, radiological risk at the factlit.Y will be reduced from fts present level.

It f s not clear whether that reduction fn radfologfcal rfsk wtll permit release of .the facility to unrestricted use not requ~rfng a C0111fssfon *

~. . licensed operator. Thfs cannot be determfn~d now because DOE plans for operation of the facility ~ave ilot been finalized and the requiranents for decontamfnatfon and deccmmfssfoning the facflfty have not yet been established.

It f s important to note, however, that under the West Valley Demonstration Project Act, the Conmission will prescribe these decontmnfnatfon and decon111f ssf onfng requirements~ In doing so, the Connissfon will detennfne the level of long term radiological risk remaining at the facflfty and any need for a lic~nsed operator. lbe Conmf ssf on considers NYSERDA, as an agency of .tbe State of New .York, to possess sufficient institutional stabflfty and ffnancfal resources, to enable ft to acquire the technical qualf ffcatfons to prevent accidents or to mf tfgate their consequences, ff a licensed oper.ator is needed when NYSERDA, or its successor, reacquires the facility.

Under paragraph 7, NYSERDA would be required to comply wfth technical speciffca-tfons and such other conditions as the Connf ssion finds to be necessary and proper. Operation of the facility at that time wfll not fnvolve_a s1gnff1cant increase in the probability or consequences*Of an accident previously evaluated

• t i ..

• - I*

t f ( When NYSERDA, or its s~cessor, reacquires the fac11it'I there wfll be no 0 possibflfty of creating a 1'fpe of accident different from those presently evaluated because the project facflftfes wfll have been decontaminated and decammtsstoned and no new*actfvtttes are authorized.

In addttton, the urgtns of .safety wfll be fncreased, rather than reduced, since the htgh level liquid radioactive waste wfll no longer be present

• and sf nee the facn tty wfll have been decontaminated and decomatssioned

• according to such requfraaents as the Conntssfon 1111 prescribe.

Upon resumpiton of lfcensed actfvftf es, the three crf terta are met and the.

'*.- proposed lfcense mod1f1cat1on may .., .be *considered to fnvolve no significant hazards consideration.

\

Conclusions Based on the above discussion, the staff has concluded that the issuance of Amendment No. 32 to Facility License No. CSF-1 involves no significant

• hazards consideration.

II. FURTHER FINDINGS In *iccordance with 10 CFR I 50.91, the staff further concludes that the issuance of the license amendment wfll not be fni*fcal to the common defense and secur11'Y or to the health and safet'I of the public.

In accordance wfth 10 CFR s 51.5(d)(4), no envfrornental report, environ-mental impact appraisal or assessment, negative declaration or finding of no sf gnf ff cant fm.,_c~ or environnental impact statement ts requfr~ with respect to the issuance of the license amendment.