[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

RE: E-M:/ Detroit Edison wants to escape monitoring requirement at Fermi 2



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enviro-Mich message from "Harris, Craig" <Craig.Harris@ssc.msu.edu>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

it seems to me that the recommendation of the commission represents a
serious regression from the outcomes of the the three mile islands
investigations . . . my sense of those investigations was a conclusion
that, for very understandable reasons (insufficient time and space, lack
of understanding of consequences), technical specifications will not
always be fully followed . . . one author, lester perrow, was led to
conclude that is enough units do the same operations over a long enough
period of time, the improbable will happen (the concept of normal
accidents) . . . thus for the commission to base its recommendation on
the logic "if everything goes right, it won't happen" would seem to be
forgetting things that appeared to have been learned from the three mile
island incident
cheers,
craig

craig k harris
department of sociology
michigan state university
429b berkey hall
east lansing  michigan  48824-1111
tel:  517-355-5048
fax:  517-432-2856


> ----------
> From: 	Alex J. Sagady & Associates[SMTP:ajs@sagady.com]
> Reply To: 	Alex J. Sagady & Associates
> Sent: 	Saturday 30 May 1998 12:27 AM
> To: 	enviro-mich@great-lakes.net
> Subject: 	Re: E-M:/ Detroit Edison wants to escape monitoring
> requirement at Fermi  2
> 
> At 08:43 PM 5/29/1998 -0400, you wrote:
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> >Enviro-Mich message from "Alex J. Sagady & Associates"
> <ajs@sagady.com>
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----
> >
> >Detroit Edison does want to install "accidental criticality"
> >detectors in all nuclear fuel handling areas.
> >
> Sorry for the second message.....This was supposed to read that
> Detroit Edison does NOT want to install "accidental criticality"
> detectors otherwise required by the regulations.......
> 
> 
> 
===================


[Federal Register: May 28, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 102)]
[Notices]               
[Page 29256-29257]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr28my98-131]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-341]

 
Detroit Edison Company; FERMI 2 Environmental Assessment and 
Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its
regulations to Facility Operating License No. NPF-43, issued to Detroit
Edison Company (the licensee), for operation of the Fermi 2 plant,
located in Monroe County, Michigan.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee, in certain cases,
from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a), which, in part, requires a
monitoring system in each area in which special nuclear material is
handled, used, or stored, that will energize clear audible alarms if
accidental criticality occurs.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application
for exemption dated April 27, 1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The purpose of 10 CFR 70.24 is to ensure that if a criticality were
to occur during the handling of special nuclear material, personnel 
would be alerted to that fact and would take appropriate action. At a
commercial nuclear power plant, the inadvertent criticality with which
10 CFR 70.24 is concerned could occur during fuel handling operations.
The special nuclear material that could be assembled into a critical
mass at a commercial nuclear power plant is in the form of nuclear fuel;
the quantity of other forms of special nuclear material that is stored
onsite in any given location (e.g., calibration sources or in-

[[Page 29257]]

core instrumentation that is not in use) is small enough to preclude
achieving a critical mass. Because the fuel is not enriched beyond 5.0
weight percent uranium-235, and because commercial nuclear plant
licensees have procedures and features that are designed to prevent
inadvertent criticality, the staff has determined that it is unlikely
that an inadvertent criticality could occur due to the handling of 
special nuclear material at a commercial power reactor. Therefore, an
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 in selected cases will
not have a negative impact on the safety of personnel during the
handling of special nuclear materials at commercial power reactors.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that inadvertent or accidental criticality will be 
precluded through compliance with the Fermi 2 Technical Specifications,
the design of the fuel storage racks providing geometric spacing of fuel
assemblies in their storage locations, and administrative controls
imposed on fuel handling procedures.
    The proposed exemption will not result in an increase in the
probability or consequences of accidents, affect radiological plant 
effluents or offsite dose, or cause any significant occupational
exposures. Therefore, there are no radiological impacts associated with 
the proposed exemption.
    The proposed exemption will not result in a change in
nonradiological effluents and will have no other nonradiological
environmental impact.
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded that there is no significant
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be
evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed exemption, the staff 
considered denial of the requested exemption. Denial of the request
would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The 
environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action
are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously
considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to 
the operation of Fermi 2 dated August 1981.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on May 7, 1998, the staff
consulted with the Michigan State official, Dennis Hahn, of the 
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no 
comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    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 letter dated April 27, 1998, which is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room located at the
Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local
public document room located at the Monroe County Library System, 3700
South Custer Road, Monroe, Michigan 48161.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of May 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Andrew J. Kugler,
Project Manager, Project Directorate III-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-14102 Filed 5-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P



> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> NEW EMAIL ADDRESS!!!            ajs@sagady.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ------
> Alex J. Sagady & Associates        Email:  ajs@sagady.com
> Environmental Consulting and Database Systems
> PO Box 39  East Lansing, MI  48826-0039  
> (517) 332-6971 (voice); (517) 332-8987 (fax)
> 
> 
> 
> ==============================================================
> ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
> and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives
> at
> http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/
> 
> Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
> majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info
> enviro-mich"
> ==============================================================
> 

==============================================================
ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at
http://www.great-lakes.net/lists/enviro-mich/

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"
==============================================================