ML20045B277
| ML20045B277 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cooper  |
| Issue date: | 06/10/1993 |
| From: | Chan T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20045B278 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9306170123 | |
| Download: ML20045B277 (4) | |
Text
=
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT COOPER NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-298 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering the issuance of a schedular exemption from the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to the Nebraska Public Power District (the licensee) for the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS), located in Nemaha County, Nebraska.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would grant a one-timc, temporary exemption from the requirements of Section III.C.1 of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, to allow Type C testing (local leak-rate testing) of 10 containment isolation valves in the reverse direction.
The licensee's request for exemption and the bases for the exemption are contained in a letter dated June 7, 1993.
The Need for the Proposed Action The purpose of Type C testing is to measure the leakage through the primary reactor containment and thereby provide assurance that the maximum allowable leakage rates are not exceeded.
Prior to the current refueling outage, the licensee had made the determination that reverse direction testing of containment isolation valves produced equivalent or more 9306170123 930620 PDR ADOCK 05000298 P
j.
conservative results than testing in the accident direction. However, leakage testing during the current outage included tests on some valves in both the accident and the reverse direction.
The results of these tests cast doubt on the determination that reverse testing is acceptable under 1
Appendix C for certain valves. During the current refueling outage, the i
licensee tested all such valves in the accident direction, where possible.
However, the current plant configuration does not permit 10 of these valves to be tested in the accident direction. As a result, the licensee has committed to reanalyze the basis for testing in the reverse direction and, if necessary, modify the plant to permit testing of the 10 valves in the accident direction.
However, due to the time required to design, procure, and install the plant modifications necessary to allow testing of the valves in the accident direction, the licensee has requested that the 10 valves be exempted from testing in the accident direction until the next refueling outage, currently scheduled to begin in the fall of 1994.
i Without the proposed exemption, the licensee would be forced, at a j
significant cost, but without any significant increase in public health and safety, to delay the restart date of the current outage, which is currently scheduled for June 21, 1993.
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action The proposed exemption would allow a one-time exemption from Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to allow Type C testing of 10 isolation valves I
in the reverse direction.
The licensee has committed to install the hardware necessary to test these valves in the accident direction during the next scheduled refueling outage unless it can otherwise show that
l
_3_
I testing in the reverse direction is adequate.
Since Appendix J requires Type C testing at every refueling outage, the requested exemption will state that the valves for which reverse testing cannot be justified must be f
tested in the accident direction at the next refueling outage, currently scheduled to begin in the fall of 1994.
i The proposed exemption will not negatively impact containment integrity and will not significantly change the release from facility accidents.
Therefore, post-accident radiological releases will not be i
significantly greater than previously determined, nor does the proposed exemption otherwise affect radiological plant effluents or result in any significant occupational exposure.
Likewise, the proposed exemption would not affect nonradiological plant effluents and would have no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternative to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the i
proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Cooper Nuclear Station, dated February 1973.
5 I
7
i i
o
( s i
Aaencies and Persons Consulted i
The staff consulted with the State of Nebraska regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental, impact statement for the proposed exemption.
Based on 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 request for i
exemption dated June 7,1993, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C., and at the local public document room at the Auburn Public Library, 118 15th Street, Auburn, Nebraska 68305.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of June 1993 FOR T)tE' NUCLEAR REfiULATQRY COMMISSION f
//C i
/J/ " +W i
Terence Chan, Acting Director l
Project Directorate IV-I Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
l J
e.
.