ML20154G727
| ML20154G727 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waltz Mill |
| Issue date: | 09/23/1998 |
| From: | Weiss S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154G692 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9810130289 | |
| Download: ML20154G727 (6) | |
Text
. _ . - - . . _ - . _ . - _ . . - . . - . . - _ - . . - . . - . _ . - - . _ - . - . . _ . - . - . -
l
. 1 l
7590 01 P l UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CBS CORPORATION WESTINGHOUSE TEST REACTOR DOCKET NO. 50-22 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering the issuance of a license amendment to the CBS Corporation (the licensee)(formerly Westinghouse Electric Corporation) that would allow decommissioning of the Westinghouse Test Reactor (WTR) located in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT l
Identification of the Procosed Action I
The WTR Facility is located in western Pennsylvania, near the town of Madison, and is on a site called the Waltz Mill site. The reactor operated from 1959 to 1962, primarily as a research and testing reactor. The facility was placed in a condition equivalent to a status later defined by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as "SAFSTOR" (safe storage) after it was shut down in 1962, and the operating license was converted to " Possession Only" (Amendment No. 2, dated March 25,1963). All fuel and
! some of the reactor internal contents have been removed from the reactor vessel and from the Waltz Mill site.
The licensee submitted a decommissioning plan in accordance with 10 CFR 50.82(b) on July 31,1997, as supplemented on March 20 and July 10,1998.
Decommissioning, as described in the plan, will be accomplished by removal and disposal 9810130289 980930 PDR ADOCK 05000022 P PDR ,
2 of the remaining reactor vesselinternal contents, the reacter vessel, and the biological shield. The balance of the WTR facility components and the remaining residual radioactive materials will be transferred to the existing SNM 770 license at the Waltz Mill site. There are no radiological limits applicable to the transfer of structures, materials, and equipment to the SNM-770 license, other than the radioactive materials possession limits specified in the SNM 770 license.
The licensee submitted a Decommissioning Environmental Report on March 20, 1998, which addresses the actual or potential environmental impacts resulting from the decommissioning of the WTR Facility, including decontamination, dismantlement, and site restoration activities.
Opportunity for a hearing was afforded by a " Notice of Proposed issuance of a License Amendment and an Order Authorizing Disposition of Component Parts, Termination 2
of Facility License, and Opportunity for Hearing" published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on l
October 21,1997 (62 FR 54656). There were no requests for a hearing. !
Need for the Procosed Action The proposed action is necessary because of Westinghouse Electric Corporation's 1962 decision to cease operations permanently at the WTR. As specified in 10 CFR 50.82, any licensee may apply to the NRC for authority to surrender a license voluntarily and to decommission the affected facility. Further,10 CFR 51.53(d) stipulates that each applicant for a license amendment to authorize decommissioning of a production or utilization facility shall submit with its application an environmental report that reflects l
l any new information or significant environmental change associated with the proposed l
I l
j l
j l
3 l I
decommissioning activities. Also, decommissioning the WTR and transferring the residual
)
radioactivity and remaining WTR facilities to the SNM 770 license is to allow efficient management of the Waltz Mill site under one license. i l
i EnvironmentalImoact of the Prooosed A1110D i All decontamination will be peirmed by trained personnelin accordance with previously reviewed procedures and will be overseen by experienced health physics staff.
Solid and liquid waste will be removed from the facility and managed in accordance with NRC requirements. The WTR staff has calculated that the collective dose equivalent to the WTR staff for the project will be less than 0.39 person sievert (39 person rem, j Decommissioning Plan, July 25,1991, page 2 29). The maximum calculated public i
exposure, to the most exposed person, from the planned decommissioning of the WTR would be less than 1 x 104 sievert per year (1 mrem per year, Westinghouse letter, !
l March 20,1998, page 9). l
}
The above conclusions were based on all proposed operations being carefully planned and controlled, all contaminated components being removed, packaged, and ,
I shipped offsite or controlled under SNM-770. Furthermore, the existence of radiological control procedures that will be in place will help ensure that releases of radioactive wastes j i
from the facility are within the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 and are as low as reasonably !
achievable ( ALARA). ;
I Based on the review of the specific proposed activities associated with the !
1 dismantling and decontamination of the WTR facility, the NRC staff has determined that there will be no significant increase in the amounts of radioactive effluents that may be 1 1
released offsite, and no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. j l
i i
. . _ . . ..._.___._m._._. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _
l 4
With regard to nonradiological impacts, the proposed action will not result in a change in nonradiological plant effluent and will have no other nonradiological impact.
Accordingly,'the Commission concludes that there are no significant environmental l
impacts associated with the action.
Alternatives to the Prooosed Action l The four alternatives available for disposition of the WTR are: DECON, SAFSTOR, .
ENTOMB, and no action. These alternatives are defined as follows:
DECON is the alternative in which the equipment, structures, and portions of the facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are removed or decontaminated to a level that permits the property to be released for unrestricted use shortly after cessation of operations.
SAFSTOR is the alternative in which the nuclear facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the nuclear facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated (deferred decontamination) to levels that permit release for unrestricted use.
ENTOMB is the alternative in which radioactive contaminants are encased in a structurally long-lived material, such as concrete, the entombed structure is
~
appropriately maintained and continued surveillance is carried out until the radioactivity decays to a level permitting release of the property for unrestricted use.
The licensee has evaluated the pros and cons of these alternatives in a letter dated March 20,1998, and has given acceptable justification for proposing the modified DECON approach. it is considered a modified DECON approach because the WTR facility will not be released for unrestricted use but will be transferred to an existing NRC materials license.
The principal reasons for this selection are as follow:
r
.~ - . _ . . . . _ , . . _ . . . . _ . , _
5 l
l
- 1. The facility has been in the SAFSTOR mode for 35 years and the majority of {
benefit from radioactive decay has already been realized.
l
- 2. Considering the potential for future escalation in the cost of radioactive waste l burial and demolishment activities, the modified DECON alternative is most beneficial now.
- 3. Integrating the remaining WTR area into the existing materials license at the site willimprove the efficiency of the decommissioning activities for the entire site at Waltz Mill. Key individuals that will be performing the decommissioning activities have experience from nther decommissioning and remediation projects, including performing the remediation of the Waltz Mill Site.
The only alternative to the proposed dismantling and decontamination activities is to maintain possession of the reactor in the SAFSTOR mode. This approach would include monitoring and reporting for the duration of the safe storage period. However, the licensee has determined that it would be more efficient to terminate the reactor license by removing the remaining reactor vessel internal contents, the reactor vessel and the biological shield, and transferring the balance of the facility components and remaining residual radioactivity to the existing SNM-770 license.
Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Environmental Report submitted on March 20,1998, for the WTR.
Acencies and Persons Contacted In accordance with its stated policy, on June 23,1998, the NRC staff consulted with the Pennsylvania State Official, Ray Woods, of the Bureau of Radiation Protection, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, regarding the environmentalimpact l
l l
,~
l l
l i
6 l of the proposed action. There was no objection to the conclusions reached in the l
environmental assessment.
f FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated July 31,1997, March 20, and July 10,1998, which are available for pubic inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building,2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of September 1998.
l l FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, i
, -h ~
W ; vl& J
' Seymour H. Weiss, Director
{
Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
l i
l l