ML17055E282
| ML17055E282 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1988 |
| From: | Capra R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17055E283 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8811020016 | |
| Download: ML17055E282 (8) | |
Text
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 DOCKET NO. 50-410 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuing an exemption from certain requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.71(e)(3)i), to the Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (the licensee), for the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2 (NMP-2), located at the licensee's site in Oswego County New York.
ENYIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Pro osed Action:
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from meetinq certain requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.71(e)(3)(i).
Specifically, 10 CFR Part 50.71(e)(3)(i) requires licensees to submit a revision of the original FSAR containing those original pages that are still applicable plus new replacement pages within 24 months of either July 22, 1980 or the date of issuance of the operating license, whichever is later.
10 CFR Part 50.71(e)(3)(i) also requires this revision of the FSAR to be up-to-date as of a maximum of 6 months prior to the date of filing the revision.
A license limited to 5
percent of rated power was issued for NMP-2 on October 31, 1986, and a license authorizing operation up to 100 percent of rated power was issued July 2, 1987.
The exemption would allow the licensee to delay the submittal of the updated Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) for Nine Mile Point, Unit 2 (NMP-2) for 4
approximately six months or no later than April 30, 1989.
In addition, the SSii020016 SSi026 PDR ADOCK 050004i0 P
exemption would allow the licensee to submit only the revised pages of the FSAR rather than submitting a complete, updated FSAR.
Mhen the updated FSAR is submitted no later than April 30, 1989 it will be updated to April 30, 1988.
Although this will be up to a year before the actual submittal date, it is only six months before the original required submittal date.
The licensee's request for exemption, and the basis therefor are contained in its letter of September 16, 1988.
The Need for the Pro osed Action The exemption is required in order to permit the licensee to delay the submittal of the updated FSAR and to submit only those pages revised since the last FSAR amendment in May 1987.
The NMP-2 FSAR is unusually large (35 volumes) and substantial effort, over 55,000 person hours, is estimated to be involved in the proiect.
Environmental Im acts of the Pro osed Action:
The exemption would allow submittal of the updated FSAR to be delayed six months.
The exemption would also permit the licensee to submit only those pages of the FSAR which have been revised.
This exemption is administrative and will not affect plant hardware or procedures.
The proposed exemption affects only the method by which the FSAR is kept up-to-date and does not affect plant operation or the risk of facility accidents.
Accordingly, the exemption will not increase the probability or consequences of any reactor accident sequence and will not increase the probability or consequences of any reactor accident sequence and will not otherwise affect any other
lh radiological impact associated with the facility.
Consequently, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
With regard to potential non-radiological
- impacts, the proposed exemption does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternative to the Pro osed Action:
The staff has concluded that there is no siqnificant environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption.
Therefore, alternatives to the exemption will have either no environmental impact or greater environmental impact.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption.
Such action would not reduce the environmental impacts of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit 2 operations.
Alternative'se of Resources:
These actions associated with the granting of the proposed exemption as detailed above do not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the "Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2," dated May 1985.
A encies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's submittal that supports the proposed exemption discussed above.
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 request for the exemption as listed herein, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document
- Room, 2120 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20555 and at the Penfield Library, State University College,
- Oswego, New York '3126.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this g 7 day of October 1988.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Robert A. Capra, Director Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor P
- ects, II d'or-z LA:CVogan 10/ (+88 PDI-1 PD:RCapra 10/
/88 PM:MHaughey:dig 10//7/88 P
A AD.
oger 10
/88 OGC 1
88 RP arga 1
/88
~'