ML13316B236
| ML13316B236 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1989 |
| From: | Rood H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13316B235 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8901190458 | |
| Download: ML13316B236 (4) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-206 SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO. 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption to Southern California Edison Company, et al., (the licensees), for operation of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 1, located in San Diego County, California.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action: Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix 0 to 10 CFR 50, "Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors", states that air locks that have been opened during periods when containment integrity is not required by the plant's technical specifications shall be tested at the end of such periods at not less than Pa (calculated peak containment pressure for design-basis events). The licensees have requested a partial exemption from this requirement. The licensees propose to conduct the above test only when maintenance has been conducted that could affect the sealing capability of the air lock door seals. Otherwise, the air lock would be tested at least every six months at Pa (49.4 psig) and also within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> after each closing at 10 psig test pressure.
890119 0 4 58 890106 PDR ADOCK 050002 P
0 06 PNuI/'_
-2 The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed exemption is required to allow the licensees to revise the air lock testing requirements as described above.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The NRC staff has completed its safety evaluation of licensees' request and has concluded that (1) under the conditions described, the door seal test of 10 psig is sufficient to demonstrate the continuing integrity of the air lock and (2) the licensees proposed alternative method accomplishes the intent of the regulation.
The proposed action would not involve a significant change in the probability or consequences of any accident previously evaluated, nor does it involve a new or different kind of accident. Consequently, any radiological releases resulting from an accident would not be significantly greater than previously determined. The proposed exemption does not otherwise affect routine radiological plant effluents. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption. The Commission also concludes that the proposed action will not result in a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupa tional radiation exposure.
With regard to nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemption does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
-3 The Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License and Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination and Opportunity for Hearing in connection with this action was published in the Federal Register on September 7, 1988 (53 FR 34611). No request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene was filed following this notice.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
Because the Commission has concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action, there is no need to examine alternatives to the proposed action.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the Final Environmental Statement related to operation of San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 1, dated October 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensees' request that supports the proposed exemption. The NRC staff did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for exemption dated March 20, 1987, as supplemented July 22, 1988 which are
-4 available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the General Library, University of California, P.O. Box 19557, Irvine, California 92713.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of January, 1989.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Harry Rood, Acting Director Project Directorate V Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation