ML20044A858
| ML20044A858 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | River Bend  |
| Issue date: | 07/09/1990 |
| From: | Charemagne Grimes Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20044A859 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9007160198 | |
| Download: ML20044A858 (4) | |
Text
_
y.
u' {
s
- y, i
.n M
7590-01 q
i UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f
GULF STATES UTILITIES COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-458 m
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
[
[{. !
't The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cossnission (the Connission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-47, issued to n
i l'
Gulf States-Utilities Company, (the licensee), for operation of River Bend
.i l-Station, Unit No.1, located in West 'Feliciana Parish. Louisiana.
~
-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT I4 Identification of Proposed Action By letter dated May 14, 1990, as supplemented by letter dated June 26,
~
1990,-thelicenseeproposedtochangetheTechnicalSpecifications(TS)to increase-the operating suppression pool temperature limit from 95'F to 100'F.
- Seasonalthighiambient temperatures and other heat sources which discharge to the suppression pool can cause the pool temperature to approach the current 95'F limit and possibly enter the TS ACTION statement. This can result in L
extended operation of suppression pool cooling systems and, if the' suppression pool temperature cannot be reduced, in a plant shutdown.
1 '.
The-Need for the Proposed Action i
The proposed change to the TS is required in order to provide an increase l,
of 5'F in the suppression pool temperature limit to alleviate the potential for power reduction or shutdown as the result of increasing suppression pool temperature.
l 9007160198 900709 PDR ADOCK 05000458 P
PDC L
w 2
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The Comission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revision to TS and concludes that the increase in the allowable suppression pool temperature limit from 95'F to 100'F is acceptable. All containment dynamic loads that are affected by the change were initially designed and analyzed at 100'F. Therefore, the design basis events utilizing an initial suppression pool temperature are bounded by the design limits. Additionally, there is adequate margin to all design limits. The 105'F limit on allowable pool temperature during safety system testing which adds heat to the suppression pool and the suppression pool temperature limit requiring irmediate plant shutdown (110'F) and vessel depressurization(120'F)willremainunchanged. Therefore, the proposed changes do not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in any types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that this proposed action would result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed changes involve systems located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 3
20.
It'does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Corsnission concludes that there are no
.significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
The Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment and Opportunity for Hearing in connection with this action was published in the Federal Register on June 13,1990(55FR24013). No request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene was filed following this notice.
d-
,,.0Q?
+
m 3-y' Alternative to the Proposed Action Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant environmental effects that.would result from the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts 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.
Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the, use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for River Bend Station, Unit No.1, dated January 1985 (NUREG-1073).
Agencies and Persons Consulted The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact.
statement for the proposed license amendment.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude 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 i
amendment dated May 14, 1990, and a supplement dated June 26, 1990, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, e
- .g.3 l
~j g
4 i
2120 L Street, N.W., Washington' D.C. and at the Government Documents Department, l
.t Louisiana State University Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70803.
r Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of July 1990.
1 t
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
$W 3 L}
- b Christopher I. Erimes; Director-L Project Directorate IV.2-Division of Reactor Projects. III.
IV, Y and Special Projects L
0ffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 1
I i
\\
l 1
i 1
l l-3 m
1' i
m.
-