ML20042D236
| ML20042D236 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinton  |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1989 |
| From: | Jocelyn Craig Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042D238 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9001080102 | |
| Download: ML20042D236 (5) | |
Text
.
4 a.
<c 3
7590-01, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMNISSION.
~
i ILLINDIS POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
DOCKET NO. 50-461 ENVIRONMENTALASSNSSMENT'ANDFINDINGg-3 NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
-l The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering a
i issuance of an amendment to the Illinois Power Company (IP), and Soyland Power Cooperative, Inc. (the licensees) for Clinton Power Ftation, Unit 1, _
located in DeWitt' County, Illinois.
l r
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT-
~ Identification of Proposed Action:
4
- w The licensees have requested a license amenoment that would revise the Technical Specifications (TS) to remove the cycle-specific parameter limits from the Technical Specifications. These cycle-specific limits will be maintair.ed in a " Core Operating Limits Report," ond the Technical Specifications will be revised to reference this report. The Technical
. Specifications will also be revised to add administrative controls for the Core Operating Limits Report. These administrative controls will require that the values in the report be established using NRC approved methodologies, and that copies of the report be supplied to the NRC upon issuarice. This action is in response to NRC Generic Letter 88-16.
\\
=
P
j ff:
.. m N This revision to the Clinton Power Station license would be made in 1
response to the licensees' application for amendment dated June 12, 1989 as
. amended: August 17, 1989.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
Under the current Technical Specifications, a facility must have a license amendment processed to support each refueling (and the subsequent cycle of reactor operation) due to changes in cycle-specific parameters.
NRC Generic Letter 88-16, "Remeval of Cycle-Specific Parameter Limits from Technical Specifications," proposed an alternative which eliminates the need to process a license amendment to support each refueling. Generic Letter 88-16 lists three actions which are required to support the removal of cycle-specific parameter limits from the Technical Specifications. The first action requires the additior. of a formal-report that includes.the values of cycle-specific parameter limits that have been established using an NRC-approved methodology and that are consistent with all applicable limits cf the safety analysis.
The second requires the addition of an administrative reporting requirement to submit'the formal report on cycle-specific parameter limits to the NRC, The L
third requires the modification of the individual Technical Specifications to note that cycle-specific parameters shs11 be maintained within the limits provided in the defined formal report.
Pursuant to 10 CFR S0.90, IP, et al.,
have proposed an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NpF-62 which L
consists of changes to the Technien1 Specifications. The changes establish a
" Core Operating 1.imits Report," provide administrative controls for that report, and modify the TS that contain cycle-specific parameters to reference that report.
0
- Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The proposed changes provide an acceptable response to the NRC guidance p
provided in NRC Generic Letter 88-16 on modifying cycle-specific parameter limits in TS. Plant operations will continue to be limited in accordance with the values of cycle-specific parameter limii.s that are established using NRC approved methodologies. The change is administrative in nature and has no j
impact on plant safety..
The Comission has concluded that these changes do not significantly increase the probability or consequences of any accident and that potential radiological releases during normal operations'or transients would not be
(
increased. With regard to non-radiological impacts, the proposed amendment involves systems located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR j
t Part 20. They do not affect non-radiological plant effluents and have no i
other environmental impact. Therefore, the staff also concludes that there
{
are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the i
proposed amendment, q
Accordingly, the Comission findings in the " Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Clinton Power Station, Unit No. 1" dated May 1982 regarding radiological environmental impacts from the plant during normal operation or after accident conditions, are not adversely altered by this action.
IP is comitted to operate Clinton, Unit 1 in accordance with standards and regulations to maintain occupational exposure levels "as low as reasonably achievable."
et i
1
, Alternative to the Proposed Actions:
Since the Commission has concluded that there are no significant environ-mental effects that would result'from the proposed action, any alternative with l
equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment. This would not reduce environmental impacts of plant operation and would result in-reduced operational flexibility.
s Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously 1
considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Clinton Station, Unit 1, dated May 1982.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff reviewed the licensees' request of June 12, 1989 as amended August 17, 1989 anc did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT INPACT:
The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact staterent for the proposed license amendment.
Based upon this environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that t
the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
The Notice of Consideration of Issuarce of Amendment and Opportunity for L
Hearing in connection with this action was published in the Federal Register on 1
l' August 2,1989(54FR31900). No request for hearing or petition for leave to l
intervene was filed following this notice.
l l
For further details with respect to this action, see the request for 6mendment dated June 12, 1989 as amended Au9ust 17,1989 and the Final Environnental Statement for the Clinton Power Station dated May 1982, which are available for public inspection at the Connission Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C.
20555 and at the Vespasian Warner Public Library,120 West Johnson Street, Clinton, Illinois 61727.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 14th the day of December 1989.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N n
JohnW.Craig,ProjectDirec r
Project Directorate 111 2 Division of Reactor Projects - !!!,
IV, Y and Speial Frojects l
-