ML17199S960
| ML17199S960 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1987 |
| From: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17199S959 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8709230502 | |
| Download: ML17199S960 (3) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NOS. 50-237/249 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT 7590-01 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from the technical requirements of Section III.G.3 of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 to the Commonwealth Edison Company (CECo) (the licensee) for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit No~. 2 and 3, located at the licensee's site in Grundy County, Illinois.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action.would grant on exemption from the technical.require-ments of Section III.G.3 of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 relating to the fixed-fire detection and suppression capability in the drywell expansion gap.
The Need for the Proposed Action Following the January 20, 1986 fire involving the polyurethane foam in the drywell expansion gap, the licensee was told by letter dated February 25, 1986, that the separation criteria in Section III.G.3 of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 are apparently not met.
Further, the licensee was requested to address this matter of compliance with Appendix R, showing either why the unit is in compliance, how compliance can be achieved, or, request an exemption from any requirement of Appendix R that is not met.
The licensee's response of May 6, 1986, showed that the unit was in compliance in every way except the automatic fire detectors and the fixed suppression require-ments.
By letter dated June 5, 1986, the Licensee proposed exemption from the detection and suppression requirement.
870. ADOC~ -.o50Q02:37
.. ~"
PDR.
PD0R.~*.
F
. *-~-.,
7590-01 Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action does not affect the level of fire protection required by Appendix]_~ The automatic detection and fixed fire suppression are not physically possible to install in the two-inch drywell expansion gap.
However, the licensee has shown that a spread of any fire in the two-inch drywell gap to the drywell is not possible, and that if the fire did spread into the reactor building it would only affect one fire area of one unit.
Therefore, an independent safe shutdown path would be available.
In addition, the licensee showed that impairment of safe shutdown for either unit would not result if the penetrations through the drywell gap were damaged.
Thus, fire-related radiological releases will not differ from those determined previously and the proposed exemption does not otherwise affect facility radiological effluent or occupational exposures.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemption does not affect plant nonradiological effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes there are no measurable radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives with equal or lesser environmental impact need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative to the exemption would be to require rigid compliance with the requirements of Section III.G.3 of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50.
Such action would not enhance the protection of the environment and would result in unjustified costs for the licensee.
. -~_,.:~.,.
7590-01 Alternative Use of Reso~rces:
This action does not involve the use of resources not considered previously in the Final Environmental Statement for Dresden Units 2 and 3.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO S1GNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exe~ption. *Based upon the environmental assessment, t~e NRC staff conc~udes that the pr~po~ed action ~ill not have a significant effect on the qua*l ity of the human environment.
For further details with respect.to this proposed.action, see the licensee's letters dated May 6 and June 5,.1986.
Thes.e letters are.available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W~, Washington, D.C. and at the Morris Public Library, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60451.
- Dated at Bethesda, Maryland 'this 18th.day of September 1987.
>)~;;;r;.:AL/-2 Daniel R. Muller, Director Project Directorat~ III-2.
Division of Reactor Projects III,.
- IV, V, ~nd Special Projects