ML20035B870
| ML20035B870 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 03/30/1993 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035B867 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9304050220 | |
| Download: ML20035B870 (4) | |
Text
.__
4 h
-l 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY-COMMISSION NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. WIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-245 i
-?
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT' IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of a one-time exemption from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraphs:
III.D.2(a) and III-.D.3 to the Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO or the licensee) for the Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, located in l
i New London County, Connecticut.
.l ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the ProDosed Action:
The proposed action would grant temporary relief from the 2-year j
schedular requirement associated with Type B and C periodic local leak-rate tests (LLRTs), with the exception of penetration X-25/202D, and allow the l
tests to be performed during the Cycle 14 refueling outage.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
One of the conditions of all operating licenses for water-cooled power reactors, as specified in 10 CFR 50.54(o), is that primary reactor containments shall meet the containment leakage test requirements set forth in l
f Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, Paragraph III.D.2(a) and III.D.3, require, in part, that Type B and C LLRTs shall be performed in'no case at intervals l
i greater than 2 years.
9304050220 930330 PDR ADOCK 05000245 P
u-N On April 7,1991, NNECO commenced the most recer,t containment LLRT program at Millstone Unit 1 in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Type B and C periodic test requirements. As a result of the unusually long 1991 (Cycle 13) refueling outage, a shutdown for licensed operator requalification training and erosion / corrosion inspections, and an unp1rnned shutdown for service water system piping inspections and repair, the Cycle 14 refueling outage has been rescheduled from February 1993 to' approximately February 1994. The requirement to perform Type B and C LLRTs within a 2-year interval would. require a plant shutdown during Cycle 14 solely to perform
.i LLRTs, given the current Millstone Unit I refueling outage schedule.
Such a.
i i
shutdown would result in an increase in occupational radiation exposure and an additional transient on the plant.
i Environmental Impacts of the proposed Action:
The proposed exemptions would postpone the Type B and C tests j
approximately 10 months. Millstene Unit I has a history of good LLRT i
performance, with the exception of penetration X-25/202D which has failed its
.t "As-Found" tests during several refueling outages.
Penetration X-25/202D will I
be tested during Cycle 14 to confirm that previous corrective actions have i
I been effective.
Therefore, no exemption is being requested for this-i i
penetration. The remaining penetration test results indicate improved overall i
containment integrity, as shown by Millstone Unit l's last two individual. leak rate test "As-Left" tests. The NRC staff has reviewed the proposed exemptions and concluded the extension of the test period for the Type B and C tests will not compromise containment integrity.
This conclusion is based, in general, f
3 on good LLRT performance, with the exception of penetration X-25/202D, during 4
4
.~
the last several refueling outages.
The unexpected delay in start-up from the last refueling outage and two mid-cycle shutdowns extended the refueling cycle length, therefore, the time for which the containment was actually exposed to normal plant operating environment is less than the maximum Type B and C test intervals.
In addition, the licensee has committed to two compensatory l
measures.
The licensee has agreed to test as many penetrations as practical on line and to test as many penetrations as possible during any future unplanned outages.
Thus, radiological releases will not differ from those determined previously and the proposed exemptions do not otherwise affect facility radiological effluent or occupational exposures.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemptions do not affect plant nonradiological effluents and have no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes there are no measurable radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemptions.
l Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemptions, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. The principal alternative to the exemptions would be to deny the exemptions requested.
Such action would not enhance the protection of the environment.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not considered previously in the Final Environmental Statement for Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1.
i Acencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
3.-
i
! i FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commissioa concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the l
quality of the_ human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined i
not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the propor.ed exemptions.
For further details with respect to this proposed action, see the f
licensee's letter dated January 18, 1993, as supplemented by letter dated March 22, 1993, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the local public document room located at the Learning Resources Center, Thames Valley State Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich, Connecticut 06360.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of March 1993.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
htLL
/Jo & F. Stolz, Director
[
Pr ject Directorate I-vision of Reactor Projects - I/II l
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
[
r i
r I'
.