ML20056A433
| ML20056A433 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/31/1990 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| FRN-55FR29043 AD04-1-025, AD4-1, AD4-1-25, NUREG-1398, NUREG-1398-DRFT, NUREG-1398-DRFT-FC, NUDOCS 9008070358 | |
| Download: ML20056A433 (57) | |
Text
.
l Environmental Assessment For P.roaosec Rule On Xuclear Power Plant License Renewal Draft Report for Comment U.'S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research i
,~
+
l t,
l
%.i -
p$
l
- s* Teiin '
- PDR 1398 R
AVAILABILITY NOTICE Availability of Rotorence Materials Cited in NRC Publications Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sourcos:
1.
The NRC Public Document Room 2120 L Stroot, NW., Lower Level Washington, DC 20555 2.
The Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Offico, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013 7082 3.
The National Technical information Service Springfield VA 22161
/sithough the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publica-tions, it is not intended to be exhaustive.
Reforonced documents available for inspection and copying for a foo from the NRC Public Document Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda, NRC bulletins, circulars, information noticos, inspection and investigation noticos; licensoo event reports; vendor reports and correspondence; Commission papers; and applicant and licensoo docu.
monts and correspondence.
The following documents in the NUREG series are availablo for purchase from the GPO Sales Program; formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC-sponsored conference proceed-Ings, and NRC booklets and brochuros. Also available are regulatory guides, NRC regula-tions in the Code of Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuancos.
Documents available from the National Technical Information Service includo NUREG-serios reports and technical reports prepared by other Fodoral agenclos and reports prepared by the Atomic Energy Commission, fomrunner agency to the Nuclear Rogulatory Commission.
Documents available from public and special technical libratios include all open literature items, such as books, journal articles, and transactions. Federal Register noticos. Fodoral and Stato logislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from those librarios.
Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non NRC conference proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited.
' Single copios of NRC draft reports are aveilable free, to the extent of supply, upon written request to the Office of Information Resources Management, Distribution Section U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555.
Copios of industry codos and standards used in a substantive mannor in the NRC regulatory process are maintained at the NRC Library, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, for use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copyrighted and may bo purchased t
from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the '!
American National Standards institute,1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018.
l
~ ' ~ ~
c, i
+
NURiiu-1398 i
Environmental Assessment For Proposed Rule On Nuclear Power Plant License i
Renewal 4
Ikaft Report for Comment Manuscript Completed: hlay 1990 Date Published: July 1990 1
i
. Division of Safety issue Resolution l
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Researcli
-4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wasliington, DC 20555
. p " "'%,
\\
s
)
i
___m.________._
m._m.______
_._m____-a
ABSTRACT The Atomic Energy Act and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) regulations provide for the renewal of nuclear power plant operating licenses beyond their initial 4^, ear term.
The Act and NRC regulations, however do not specify theprocedures, criteria,andstandardsthatmustbesatisfledinorderto renew a license.
The NRC is proposing a rule (10 CFR Part 54) to codify such requirements prior to the receipt of applications for license renewal.
The rule for license renewal ensures that a plant's current licensing basis will be supplemented by an effective program to manage plant equipment aging so as to ensure continued acceptable safety during the renewal term.
The NRC has assessed the possible environmental effects of promulgating require-ments in 10 CFR Part 54 now rather than employing such requirements in an ad hoc manner in individual licensing actions The rule requires the development of -
information and analyses to identify aging problems of systems, structures, and components that will be of concern during the renewal term and will not be con-trolled by existing regulatory programs.
Required action may be replacement, refurbishment, inspection, testing, or monitoring.
Such actions will generally be within the range of similar actic's taken for plants during the initial operating term.
These actions would be primarily confined within the plants with potential for only minor disruption to the environment.
It is unlikely that these actions would change the operating conditions of plants in ways that would change the environmental effects already being experienced.
Relicensing under' existing regulations would also be primarily focused on aging degradation and would likely result in requirements similar to those that will result from relicensing under the proposed rule.
The promulgation of 10 CFR Part 54 has clear advantages relative to regulatory stability and administrative efficiency.
However, it will not result in environmental effects significantly different from those arising from relicensing under existing regulations.
The NRC con-cludes that promulgation of 10 CFR Part 54 would not significantly affect the environment and, therefore, a full environmental impact statement is not required and a Finding of No Significant Impact can be made.
111
7 1
'L 9
f'I TABLE OF CONTENTS P,3g ABSTRACT..............................................................
iii LIST OF FIGURES.......................................................-
vi
. LIST OF TABLES........................................................
vi lxECUTIVE
SUMMARY
vii 4
1.'
INTRODUCTION.....................................................
1-1 1.1 Background..................................................
1-1 1.2 Purpose of This Environmental Assessment....................
1-3 t
2.
. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION..................................
2-1
^
3.
'NELD FOR PROPOSED ACTION.........................................
31 3.1 -Introduction..
4 3-1 3.2 To Ensure That License Renewal Plants Operate with an Acceptable Level of Safety..................................
31 m
3.3. To Ensure Uniformity and Consistency in Implementing License Renewal..............................................
3-1 3.4 To Ensure That Aging of Nuclear Plant Components is Adequately Considered.......................................
J-2
- 3. 5 To Ensure an Efficient Application Review-by the NRC.................................................
3-2' 3.6 :To Allop U mely'and Adequate Planning by the Electric i
utility 's.ustry.............................................
'3-2 e
.4.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF FROPOSED ACTION'.........................
4 -
4.1. Activities Associated with Relicensing.........._.,,..........
4-1 4.1'.I' Relicensing under Proposed Rule.......................
4-1
'4.1.2 Relicensing under Existing Rules.....................
%8
- 4. 2_
Environmental Impacts >.._......................,.............
4-9 h
4.2.1; Occupational' Radiation Dose for Requirements Imple-o mented at Time of License Renewal :...................
4 4-4.2.2' Population Radiation Dose _for Routine Operation.....
4-10:
4.2.3.0ccupational Radiation Dose for' Routine Operation
...t
+ 14 -
4.2.4 Severe Accidents...................,...............
4-16.
4.2.5 Ecological Impacts..........................,.....-
4-17s 4.' 2, 6 Socioeconomic Impacts............-.....................
'4-20:
- 4. 2. 7 Environmental Impacts of Decommission!ng.............
4-21
- l
,g L4.2.8 Economic Impacts on Utilities and Ratepayers.........
4*214
- 4'.2.9'_ Spent Fuel Management
- ...................
4-21 4.2.10 Low-Level Waste Management-............................
4-22 5.--
-CONCLUSIONS --
' 5.
' APPENDIX ' ENV'IRONMENTAL-IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED RULE....
A '
c o
1 4
?
I n.
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
LIST OF FIGURES Figure
.P.a ge 4.1 Total-bcdy population dose from nuclear power plant effluents during normal operations......................................
4-13 4.2 Occupational radiation exposure:
1973-1987...................
4-15
~
LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 Representative enhanced inservice test and inspection activities in support of aging assessment and management......
4-2 4.2 Estimated radiological impacts for boiling water reactor upgrade items implemented at license renewal.................,
4-11 4.3 Estimated radiological impar'.s for pressurized water reactor upgrade items implemented at license renewal..................
4-12 A.1 Summary of hardware-related modif.1 cations resulting from Systematic Evaluation Program reviews of three nuclear power A-7
]
plants.......................................................
EFKX m
vi
i EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Introduction The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) proposes to amend its regulations to define the regulatory requirements for renewing operating licenses for nuclear power plants for up to 20 years.
In fulfillment of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 and 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC must consider the impacts on the environment of the promulgation of the proposed rule.
The purpose of this environmental assessment (EA) is to provide an evaluation of those impacts and to determine whether an environmental impact statement (EIS) needs to be prepared in support of this proposed rule.
Description of Proposed Action The proposed action is the issuance of a rulu (10 CFR Part 54) by the NRC that will set forth the procedures and requirements 'or utilities to submit license renewal applications and that will provide the standards for NRC staff review and approval of those applications.
Under this proposed rule, a licensee sub-mitting a license renewal application would be required to provide to the NRC sufficient information to determine whether or not continued operation of the facility during the renewal license term would endanger public health and safety 1
or the environment.
Regulatory guidance and a standard review plan are also being developed to provide guidance to the industry and to the NRC staff on the manner in which the rule will be implemented.
Part of the regulatory guidance to industry will I
be provided by safety evaluation reports on approximately 11 industry technical l
reports.
Need for Proposed Action In anticipation of the expiration of nuclear power plant 40-year operating licenset, the NRC staff is developing a license renewal rule and associated safety and aging criteria.
The NRC believes that developing a rule for license renewal that sets forth clear standards and technical requirements for the license renewal process is desirable:
To ensure that license renewal plants operate with an acceptable level of safety.
To ensure uniformity and consistency in implementing license renewal.
To' ensure that aging of nuclear plant components is adequately considered.
To ensure that the license renewal review process is efficient and effective.
To allow timely and adequate planning by the electric utility industry, l
l 1
vii
i Environmental Impacts of Proposed Action The staff has considered how environmental impacts from relicensing under the proposed 10 CFR Part 54 might differ from environmental impacts that might occur with relicensing under existing regulations.
There will be little difference because the requirements should be similar.
Both approaches would result in operation of plants up to 20 or more years beyond the expiration of the initial license.
Under both approachus, there will be emphasis on the identification, monitoring, and mitigation of aging degradation that can affect the safety performance of systems, structures, and components.
In recent years increasing attention is being given to aging degradation as the central tech-nical concern for plant life extension and license renewal, both in this country and abroad.
There is reason to believe that relicensing under present regula-tions has the potential for requiring the same or more monitoring and mitiga-tion of potential aging degradation in the same or more systems, structures, and components than would the aroposed rule.
The proposed rule accepts the current licensing basis of eac1 plant at the time of renewal application, gives credit to the continued effectiveness of ongoing regulatory programs, and focuses the renewal assessment on systems, structures, and components that require special attention relative to aging degradation in the renewal term.
In developing the proposed rule, the staff was considered and resolved a number of topics that would likely be considered on an ad _ hoc niant-by plant basis under the existing regulations.
Under the existTng regulations, there is the cotential for greater conservatism resulting in more requirements being placed relative to plant modifications, refurbishment, testing, monitoring, and operat-1,ng conditions.
These differences, however, are not expected to result in significant differences in the relative environmental impacts.
Many of the potential requirements involve enhanced inspection, testing, moni-toring, and engineering analyses.
These activities will identify necessary plant modifications, refurbishment, and additional testing and monitoring requirements.
The construction impacts are expected to be insignificant and will not differ greatly between the two approaches.
Under both approaches, the modifications, repairs, and replacements undertaken in each plant would not entail changes to the overall design of the plant; thus, basic plant operating parameters, such as thermal performance, power out-put, and fuel utilization would not, in general, be expected to differ or to change during any renewal term under the proposed action.
Occupational expo-sure and both radiological and nonradiological releases from the plant after the renewal are therefore not expected to differ in kind or magnitude between approaches nor from those experienced during operation prior to license renewal.
The current (1987) average dose per plant of 425 person-rems per year is expected to continue under each regulatory approach at about that level through the 20-year license renewal term.
Under either approach, each licensee will be required to identify safety ing significant components and structures of the plant that are subject to ac and, during the renewal term, to assess and manage the aging degradation of those components.
These activities will ensure that a reactor will be main-tained so as to prevent degradation of plant systems that could initiate core i
l viii
p damage accidents and degradation of systems designed to prevent accidents or mitigate their consequences.
Finally, relicensing under either approach would not significantly change the environmental impacts from storage of spent fuel and high-level waste.
Conclusions After reviewing the possible differences in requirements for license renewal under the proposed rule and under the existing regulati;1s and the environmental significance of these differences, the staff found no significant environmental impacts from the proposed 10 CFR Part 54.
Additional Alternatives Considered In addition to the proposed rule, the following alternatives were evaluated in the regulatory analysis (NUREG-1362):
License renewal using current licens'ng basis with no additional requirements.
License renewal using extension of the proposed action to require assessment against selected new-plant standards.
License renewal using extension of the proposed action to require
~*
compliancewithallnewplantstandards.
Environmental Impacts of Alternatives to Proposed Action The environmental impacts of the rulemaking alternatives-to the proposed action would be similar-to those of the proposed action, differing only in detail.
iX
_q 4
1.
INTRODUCTION The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for licensing and regulating civilian nuclear power plants, as mandated by the Atomic Ener of 1954, as amended, and by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)gy Act of 1969.
These responsibilities include protecting the public health and safety and the environment.
The nuclear power industry has matured, with several plants in operation for more than 20 years.
The Atomic Energy Act and the NRC regulations provide for the renewal of nuclear power plant operating licenses l
3 beyond their initial 40 year term.
The NRC proposes to issue a rule, 10 CFR
~
Part 54, which will establish the standards that must be met by all license renewal applicants, define the scope of information required for reviewir.g the applications, and specify the procedures for submitting license renewal applications.
In addition, a proposed change to 10 CFR Part 51 is being issued to permit the use of environmental assessments (EAs) in license renewal reviews rather than requiring environmental impact statements (EIss).
As required under the provisions of NEPA, the NRC must consider the environmental impacts of the promulgation and implementation of the proposed rule.
The NRC must also decide whether or not to prepare an EIS to support the proposed rule.
1.1 Background
On November 6, 1986, a requdst for comments on establishment of a policy state-ment on life extension of nuclear power plants was published in the Federal Rec ister (Ref.1.1).
Comments were requested on seven major policy, technical, anc procedural issues (21 separate questions).
Comments received were reviewed and a summary was provided in SECY-87-179, " Status of Staff Activities to Develop a License Renewal Policy, Regulations and Licensing Guidance and to Report on Public Comments" (Ref. 1.2).
The staff published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) on August 29, 1988, in the Federal Register (Ref. 1.3) in which the Commission announced its intention to bypass a policy statement and go directly to preparing a proposed rule on license renewal.
The ANPR also announced the availability of NUREG-1317, " Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal" (Ref. 1.4) and requested comments on the issues discussed in the NUREG.
Fif ty-three written comments were received from nuclear industry groups and individual utilities, public interest groups, and Fede n1 and State agencies in response to the ANPR and commenting on NUREG-1317, An overview and summary analysis of the comments are contained in NUREG/CR-5332, " Summary and Analysis of Public Comments on NUREG-1317:
Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal" (Ref. 1.5).
The NRC staff's views on specific license renewal issues, as they evolved in early 1989, were presented to the public in an NRC panel discussion and question and answer session at the NRC's Regulatory Information Conference, held on April 18, 19, and 20, 1989.
On October 13, 1989, the Commission announced in a Federal Register notice that a workshop would be held on November 13 and 14,198E to focus on specific technical issues, including identification of the significant technical issues 1-1
l bearing on safety.
The schedule for rulemaking and alternatives for addressing compliance with NEPA were identified as issues for discussion.
The federal Register notice also included a " Preliminary Regulatory Philosophy aiid Approach for License Renewal Regulation" and an " Outline of a Conceptual Approach to a License Renewal Rule." Two hundtyd and one persons (not including NRC staff) representing 89 organizations registered for the workshop.
In addition, written comments were received from 12 organizations.
The identification and management of aging degradation is a central concern of
- cense renewal.
Over the past decade, efforts have been made by the NRC, industry,andDOEtobetterunderstandthedegradationofnuclearpowerplant systems, structures, and components.
The NRC s research on degradation due to aging phenomena began in the early 1980s.
In 1982, the NRC staff, recognizing henomena on the continued safe operation the potential impact of plant aging p' Workshop on Plant Aging" in Bethesda, of nuclear power plants, convened a Maryland (Ref. 1.7).
The purpose of the workshop was to focus attention on how to best proceed to identify and resolve the various technical plant aging issues relevant to life extension.
In 1985, the Division of Engineering of the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research issued the first comprehensive program plan (NUREG-1144) for nuclear plant aging research (Ref. 1.8).
By 1986, age-related degradation became a more important priority with the recog-nition that utilities were interested in extending the life of their existing power plants beyond the term of up to 40 years of their original operating licenses.
In response, the NRC staff developed a document, the " Plan to Accomplish Technical Integration for Plant Aging / Life Extension," and estat-lished a Technical Integration Review Group for Aging and Life Extension (TIRGALEX).
The objectives of TIRGALEX were to clearly define the technical safety and regulatory policy issues associated with plant aging and life exten-sion and to develop a plan for resolving the issues in a timely, well-integrated manner.
In May 1987 the TIRGALEX report was issued (Ref 1.9).
It identified a broad spectrum of technical safety and regulatory policy issues.
These included identification of systems, structures, and components that are susceptible to aging and could adversely affect safety; degradation processes; s m.111ance, and maintenance requirements; and criteria for evaluat-testing, dual life.
TIRGALEX concluded that many aging phenomena are readily ing resi managed and do not pose major technical issues that would preclude life exten-sion, provided that necessary compensatory measures such as maintenance, surveillance, repair, and replacement are effectively implemented during the extended operation and, for a number of the measures, during the existing license term as well.
Also in 1988 the NRC, in cooperation with the American Nuclear Society (ANS),
the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), the American Society of Mechan-ical Engineers (ASME), aM the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), sponsored an International Nuclear Power Plant Aging Symposium.
The symposium, which was held in Bethesda, Maryland, from August 30 to September 1, 1988, was attended by more than 550 internationally prominent nuclear scientists and engineers from 16 countries.
The symposium focused on the potential safety issues arising from progressive aging of nuclear power plants.
These issues included aging of structures in austenitic steel, f atigue life of structural materials, aging of insulating materials, degradation of pumps and valves, reliability of safety system components, radiation and thermal embrittlement of metals, and erosion-corrosion of fluid-mechanical systems.
Discussion addressed 1-2
topics in the NRC staff's report NUREG-1317, which had been published imme-diately preceding the symposium.
1he proceedings of the symposium were published as NUREG/CP-0100 (Ref. 1.20).
The NRC has been closely monitoring industry efforts in plant life extension.
The DOE and the Electric Power Research Institute are sponsoring a Lead Plant Program to demonstrate the viability of plant life extension and the license renewal process developed by NRC, Under this program, renewal applications for the Yankee, Massachusetts (167 MWe) and the Monticello, Minnesota (541 MWe) plants will be submitted to NRC in 1991.
The Nuclear Management and Resources Council (NUMARC) is coordinating the development of a series of industry technical reports dealing with aging degradation of major plant components and structures.
One report provides a methodology with criteria for evaluating plant equipment for license renewal.
A regulatory analysis of the benefits and costs of the proposed rule and alternatives was prepared by the NRC staff (Ref. 1.11).
In it the efficacy of alternative technical and procedural requirements was assessed with respect to safety and regulatory efficiency.
The proposed rule and alternatives were evaluated with respect to reductions in radiation exposure and the costs of meeting the requirements of the rule.
As part of a separate rulemaking, the NRC is undertaking a generic environ-mental study for the purpose of narrowing the scope and focus of environmental effects that would need to be considered in individual relicensing actions.
To the extent this study is successful, reductions in the scope and focus will be codified through changes to 10 CFR Part 51.
Comments previously solicited and the programmatic findings in this environmental assessment in support of the present rulemaking, 10 CFR Part 54, indicate that the generic environmental study will achieve some degree of success.
That study will assess the full range of NEPA issues that will need to be reviewed in the relicensing of indi-vidual plants under Part 54.
The study will also bound the full range of 31 ants and sites in order that any issues eliminated or bounded by Part 51 will ae applicable to as large a number of plants as possible.
The study will build from the foundation provided by this environmental assessment.
l 1.2 Purpose of This Environmental Assessment l
l L
Under the NEPA, all Federal agencies must consider the effect of their actions on the environment.
Section 102(1) of the NEPA requires that the policies, regulations, and public laws of the United States be interpreted and admin-
)
istered in accordance with the policies set forth in the NEPA.
Section102(2) contains provisions to ensure that Federal agencies act according to the letter and spirit of the NEPA.
Regulations of the U. S. Council on Environmental Quality, contained in 40 CFR 1500-1508, implement the requirements of Sec-tion 102(2) of NEPA within the Federal government.
Regulations implementing the NEPA within the NRC are contained in 10 CFR Part 51.
This rulemaking is a majorFederalactionunderthecriteriasetforthin10CFRPart51.
The pre-paration of an environmental assessment of the proposed action is an initial step in fulfilling an agency's. responsibilities under NEPA.
If the appropriate NRC director determines from results of the assessment that the proposed action will significantly affect the quality of the human environment, an environ-mental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared.
If the NRC director determines 1-3
that the environmental imp 6 cts of the proposed action are not significant no furtherenvironmentalactionisrequiredotherthanpreparationofaFindIng of No Significant Impact (FONSI).
A determination may be made to issue a draft FONSI for public review and comment before making a final determination whether to prepare an EIS or a final FONSI on the proposed action.
The objective of this environmental assessment then is to assess the potential environmental impacts of promulgating the proposed rules to set standards and procedures to renew nuclear power plant licenses, to permit the use of EAs in license renewal reviews, and to determine whether the proposed action will significantly affect j
the quality of the human environment, thus requiring the preparation of an EIS.
l I
l l
l-4
<m REFERENCES FOR CHAPTER 1 1.1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), " Request for Comments on Development of Policy for Nuclear Power Plant License Renewal," Federal Register, 51 FR 40334, November 6, 1986.
- 1. 2 USNRC, " Status of Staff Activities to Develop a License Renewal Policy, Regulations and Licensing Guidance and to Report on Public Comments,"
SECY-87-179, July 21, 1987,
- 1. 3 USNRC, " Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Nuclear Plant License Renewal," Federal Register, 53 FR-32919, August 29, 1988.
1.4 USNRC, " Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal," NUREG-1317, Draft for Comment, August 1988.
1.5 D. M. Ligon and S. S. Seth, " Summary and Analysis of Public Comments on NUREG-1317:
Regulatory Options for Nuclear Plant License Renewal," The MITRE Corporation, NUREG/CR-5332, MTR-89W00031 Marca 1989.
1.6 USNRC, " Technical and Policy Consideration of Nuclear Power Plant Licens-ing Renewal," Federal Register, 54 FR 41980, October 13, 1989.
1.7 Proceedings of the Workshop on Nuclear Plant Aging, NUREG/CP-0036, (Compiled by 8. E. Bader and L. A. Hanchey, Sandia National Laboratories),
December 1982.
- 1. 8.
USNRC, " Nuclear Plant Aging Research (NPAR) Program Plan," NUREG-1144, July 1985.
1.9-Technical Integration Review Group for Aging and Life Extension, " Plan for Integration of Aging and Life-Extension Activities," May 1987, 1.10 USNRC, " Proceedings of the International Nuclear Power Plant Aging Symposium," NUREG/CP-0100, March 1989.
1.11 USNRC, " Regulatory Analysis for Proposed Rule on Nuclear Plant License Renewal," NUREG-1362, Draf t for Comment, July 1990.
i
, 5 I
L 1
2.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action is the issuance of a rule,10 CFR Part Lt, " Requirements for Renewal of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Power Plants," conforming amend-ments to other parts of 10 CFR, and changes to 10 CFR Part 51, " Environmental Protection Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory functions,"
to permit the use of environmental assessments (EAs) as part of license renewal reviews rather than requiring environmental impact statements (EISs).
The Atomic Energy Act, which permits renewal of licenses, and the license renewal rule already in effect (10 CFR 50.51) d, not contain specific procedures, crite-ria, and standards that must be satisfied in order to renew a license.
The proposed rule would codify, in NRC regulations, the procedures, criteria, and standards governing nuclear power plant license renewal.
Relicensing under the license renewal rule already in effect probably would focus on the same age-degradation concerns addressed in the development of the proposed rule but likely would result in less consistent and perhaps less comprehensive reviews
-of_ individual plants during the license renewal review.
The substantive requirements of the rule are:
" Integrated plant assessment
...which demonstrates that ag?-related degradation of the facility's structures, systems, and comronents has been identified, evaluated, and accounted for to ensure t' sat the facil-ity's licensing basis will be maintained throughout the cerm of the renewal license" (10 CFR 54.21(a)).
A justification for continuing those plant-specific esemptions granted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, and reliefs granted pursuant to 50.55(a)(3) on the basis of an assumed service life or period of operation bound by the original license term of the facility (10 CFR 54.21(b)).
Proposed modifications to the facility or its administrative control procedures resulting from the aforementioned assessments (10 CFR 54.21(c)).
An environmental report (10 CFR 54.23).
The proposed rule also addresses:
Timeliness of. submittal, the application for renewal to be submitted no later than 3 years prior to expiration of the existing operating license.
Referral of renewal applications to the Advisory Committee on Reactor
- Safety, i
Opportunity to request a public hearing.
Term of license, equal to the period of time remaining on the current license plus the additional time period requested by the licensee (no longer than 20 years).
l 2-1 1
7.
t Requirement to continue to comply with all Commission regulations.
Recordkeeping requirements.
Upon review of the application for license renewal and the preparation of a safety evaluation report and the EIS or EA, as appropriate, the NRC may issue the requested license renewal if the staff determines that there is reasonable assurance the facility can be operated for the term of the renewed license without endangering the public health and safety or the common defense and security.
This decision will be based upon the following finding:
" Appropriate actions have been or will be taken with respect to age-related degradation of those SSCs (systems, structures, and components) important to license renewal such that there is reasonable assurance that the activities authorized in the renewal license can be conducted in accordance with the current licensing basis" (10 CFR 54.31).
Under S 54.33 (Conditions of renewed license), the following become part of the renewed license of any facility:
The current licensing basis for the facility.
Conditions set forth in Sections 50.54 and 50.55a(9).
Conditions and limitations including technical specifications and provi-sions with respect to any incompleted items of plant modifications.
Cona'.tions to protect the environment that are part of the current licens-ing basis supplemented or amended as necessary to protect the environment during the term of the renewed license.
Concurrent with the rulemaking, the NRC is developir, regulatory guidance as to what will satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR Part 54.
A regulatory guide on the format and content of renewal applications will be published in draft form shortly af tor the proposed rule is published and in final form shortly after the final rule is published.
Additional regulatory guidance will be provided by the NRC through safety evaluation reports on a series of industry technical reports on major components and structures of concern for license renewal and an industry report on the process of identifying at individual plants those systems, structures, and components that are subject to aging and require special attention for license renewal.
Standard review plans will be developed, consistent with the regulatory guidance, to guide the NRC staff review of renewal applications.
2-2
3.
NEED FOR PROPOSED ACTION 3.1 Introduction The installed capacity of the approximately 118 nuclear power reactors that will be in operation by the year 2000 will total about 108 GWe, The first operating license of these plants will expire in 2000, the second will expire in 2002, and the licenses for the other 116 reactors will expire between 2007 and 2035.
l The NRC believes that development of a rule for license renewal that establishes clear standards and technical requirements for the license renewal process is I
necessary:
To ensure that license renewal plants operate with an acceptable level of safety.
To ensure uniformity and consistency in the regulatory process of imple-menting license renewal.
To ensure that aging of r.uclear plant components is adequately considered.
To ensure an efficient and effective application review process by the NRC.
To allow timely and adequate planning by the electric utility industry.
3.2 ToEnsureThatLicenseRenewalPlantsOperatewithanAcceptableLevej of Safety The proposed rule is founded upon a generic determination that each nuclear power plant's current licensing basis provides reasonable assurance of adequate protection throughout the renewal term.
The NRC believes that compliance with the licensing basis can and will be assured by (1) requiring licensees to comply with-their plant's licensing basis throughout the term of their renewed licen-
{
ses, including those addressing age-related degradation, and (2) continuing the NRC's regulatory oversight program throughout the term of a plant's renewed license.
j 3.3 To Ensure Uniformity and Consistency in Implementing License Renewal Not providing explicit guidelines on the contents and procedures for license renewal applications is contrary to the NRC's practice of deliberating in advance on potentially significant regulatory issues and providing a regula-tory framework that meets the needs of both the NRC staff and the licensees.
Under the proposed rule, the license renewal process would be administered in a structured and predictable technical, administrative, and procedural manner.
Because the criteria for determining the completeness of the information to be submitted to the NRC in support of license renewal would be well defined, the 3-1
i possibility for nonuniformity in license renewal decisions would be largely avoided.
The uniformity and consistency associated with this approach will enhance the regulatory process.
3.4 To Ensure That Aging of Nuclear Plant Components is Adequately Considered The NRC believes that specifying license renewd requirements through rulemak-ing, supplemented by revisions to regulatory guidance and standard review plans, and by safety evaluation reports prepared for industry technical reports will ensure that all technical informatian relevant to aging is considered in the preparation and review of applications for license renewal.
The technical information that must be considered includes analysis of component aging; remaining service life of components; and identification and implementation of surveillance, inspection, testing, maintenance, repair, and replacement activ-ities to ensure that component aging is adequately addressed during the remain-ing plant operating life.
3.5 To Ensure an Efficient Application Review by the NRC The license renewal requirements specified in a rule would provide the rigorous and consistent bases for review by the NRC staff of the utility technical sub-mittal and for regulatory guidance and the standard review plan that would be prepared to support license renewal.
This guidance will be used by the NRC staff in its evaluation of the adequacy of the license renewal justification provided by the utilities, thus ensuring that all relevant technical issues would Se considered.
.T3 Allow Timely and Adequate Planning by the Electric utility Industry 3.6 The nucitar power industry must plan for future electricity generating capacity needs.
15i5 planning must include consideration of the likelihood and timing of renewal of licenses for nuclear power plants.
The electric utility industry believes thet economic considerations will be the main determinant as to whether or not a renewal license will be sought for a particular plant.
To calculate the costs and benefits of renewing the license for a plant, the industry has stated that there must be a clear, practical, and predictable framework for the renewal process.
Although safety of the plants is the major statutory obliga-tion of the NRC, it is also the NRC policy Lo consider the need for and the consequences of its regulatory actions in a broader context.
The NRC believes that promulgation of a rule will meet the planning needs of the industry by reducing uncertainty and ensuring the timeliness of the review process.
3-2
F l
4.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ACTION 4.1 Activities Associated with Relicensina 4.1.1 Relicensing Under Proposed Rule The proposed rule carries the licensing basis existing at the time of submitting a renewal application into the renewal term and requires an integrated plant assessment to demonstrate that age related degradation of the facility's struc-tures, systems, and components have been identified, evaluated, and accounted for as needed to ensure that the facility's licensing basis will be maintained throughout the term of the renewed license.
The required assessment consists of a screening process to select systems, structures, and components important to license renewal based on their intended safety functions or contributions to challenging safety systems; an evaluation and demonstration of the effective-ness of the already ongoing licensee actions under existing regulatory require-ments and plant-specific programs to address aging concerns; and the imple-mentation, as necessary, of supplemental programs to prevent or mitigate age-related degradation during the renewed license period.
Where such supplemental programs are not needed at the inception of the renewal term the plan may provide for a deferred start, TherecognizedelementsfortImelymitigationof age-related degradation effects are inspection, surveillance, condition moni-toring, maintenance, trending, recordkeeping, replacement, refurbishment, and appropriate adjustments in the operating environment of the equipment in which the degradation occurs.
The enhanced inspection, surveillance, testing, and maintenance (ISTM) effort would be incremental to routine plant operation and maintenance that would be continued from the initial license term to the renewed license term.
The ISTM effort consists of two phases:
1.
Installation of special diagnostic and monitoring equipment and evaluation of plant system, component, and structural tests and examinations to estab-lish a data baseline on plant condition.
2.
Required surveillance, monitoring, and maintenance activities during the renewal term.
Table 4.1 is a representative listing of the principal diagnosis and testing activities in an ISTM program.
These activities do not include repair and replacement of equipment and structures identified ss a result of ISTM and related assessment activities.
An enhanced ISTM pr1 involve an upgrading of some or all of these activi: gram would typically ies.
The components and structures listed would also be the likely focus of refurbishment or replace-ment requirements coming from an integrated plant assessment.
Implementing this proposed action would result in repair, replacement. )r refurbishment of selected components and structures that are subject t aging.
i 4-1 l
l Table 4.1 Representative enhanced inservice test and inspection activities in support of aging assessment and management 1.
Typical Candidate BWR ISTM Enhancements BWR Reactor Pressure Ve sel Volumetrically examine all RPV beltline welds every 10 years Add fracture toughness and tensile stress specimens to surveillance program Expand iSI beyond ASME Section XI requirements to include:
UT of support knuckle and attachment weld Dimensional survey of studs, refueling bellows, and skirt weld UT of CRD stub tube to bottom head clad weld and stabilizers o
Visually assess condition of vessel exterior when insulatica is removed for general degradation of surface.
Perform a BWR vessel replacement study, including comp?ete replacement of the vessel internals and support attachments.
Enhance monitoring of core spray nozzles and CRD penetrations.
Install additional neutron flux dosimetry near the predicted peak fluence locations at vessel beltline and near sample baskets.
Increase scope of volumetric weld examination from one weld every 10 years to all welds every 10 years.
BWR Recirculation Piping and Safe Ends Install humidity sensors in containment to detect leaks.
Implement an online monitoring system to monitor pipe condition, including piping vibration and dynamics effects measurements.
Provide additional piping and safe-end temperature monitoring to better characterize transients experienced by piping.
Periodically inspect selected piping locations for mechnical wear caused by contact with attachments.
Perform an evaluation on the remaining service life of the recircula-tion pipe system cast austenitic stainless steel components due to the effects of SCC, fatigue, and thermal embrittlement.
Increase inspection frequency of stainless steel safe ends and pipe welds.
BWR Metal Containment Including Suppression Chamber Develop and implement an enhanced monitoring of the metal containment structure to include wall temperature, bellows alignment, and exterior surfaces and penetrations.
Adopt ASME containment inservice inspection revisions.
Perform a surface and volumetric examination of fabrication welds.
Inspect suppression pool and vent system exterior.
Examination and analysis of shell liner base, including removal and replatenent of a 6" square section of concrete.
Install neutron flux measuring device in drywell to record integrated flux.
4-2
Table 4.1 (Continued)
RWR Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals Develop and implement ultrasonic testing (UT) techniques to inspect the top guide in the central core region for IGSCC, the shroud-to-shroud support cylinder welds, the core spray inlet tee attachment, and the jet pump riser elbow to thermal sleeve weld region and the jet pump diffuser-to-adapter weld joint.
Monitor for degradation the performance of the safe-end replacement on the jet pump riser brace.
Perform underwater ISI of core plate for IGSCC.
Develop and implement a procedure for inspecting shroud-to-shroud support flange and access hold cover.
L alop and implement a procedure to predict incipient bolt failure due to high-cycle fatigue and stress corrosion crackingith proposed Install an enhanced loose parts monitor in accordance w r
ASME OM-12.
BWR Reactor Recirculation Pumps Perform periodic detailed inspection (disassembly / reassembly) of pump and motors.
Implement an improved pump shaft inspection using UT techniques.
Implement a comprehensive pump shaft vibration monitoring program.
Periodically determine ferrite level on pump casing exterior (thermal embrittlement).
Perform periodic surface and volumetric inspection of pump shaft.
BWR Control Rod Drive Mechanism Perform ultrasonic examination of CRD housing.
Develop and implement a crack detection and crack growth monitoring program of CRD housing.
Visually inspect CRD housing for leakage.
Perform discharge and vent valve tests at frequent intervals.
BWR Auxiliary Pumps (Motor and Turbine Driven)
Install bypass piping to allow testing during operational periods.
Install monitors for motor / turbine favit indications, Perform periodic detailed disassembly-inspection-overhaul-reassembly of pump internals.
Implement a standard sequence of full-service testing, 2.
Typical Candidate PWR ISTM Enhancements PWR Reactor Pressure Vessel Add fracture toughness and tensile stress specimens to surveillance program.
Volumetrically examine all beltline welds every 10 years.
Visually examine RPV stabilizers during each outage.
Install additional excore neutron dosimeters near predicted peak fluence locations at beltline.
Perform visual examination of RPV exterior.
Increase scope of volumetric weld examination from one weld every 10 years to all welds every 10 years.
4-3 I
Table 4.1 (Continued)
PWR Reactor Coolant Piping Install humidity sensors in main reactor building compartments and HVAC intakes for leak detection.
Perform piping vibration testing per ASME OM-3 during post refueling hot hydrotesting.
Perform piping deformation testing per ASME OH-7 during post-refueling hot hydrotesting.
Increase safe-end inspection frequency.
Establish and implement a program for periodic visual inspection of piping during refueling outages.
Increase frequency of nozzle weld inspections.
Continuous monitoring of coolant water chemistry (conductivity measurements).
PWR Reactor Pressure Vessel Supports Add neutron monitoring in RPV support structure area.
Evaluate support structure scrapings for radiation history and perform nil ductility tests on samples.
Inspect conditions of dry lubrir. ants in sliding foot areas.
Inspect neutron shield for corrosion.
PWR Reactor Pressure Vessel Internals Visually examine internal component mounting bolts.
Develop procedures to predict incipient bolt failure due to high-cycle fatigue and IGSCC degradation.
Establish and implement a vibration monitoring program of internals in accordance with ASME OM-S.
Install an enhanced loose parts monitor in accordance with proposed ASME OM-12.
PWR Steam Generators Increase scope of steam generator tube eddy-current testing.
Perform volumetric weld examination.
Install enhanced secondary-side loose parts monitoring system.
PWR Reactor Coolant Pumps Perform periodic detailed intryction (disassembly / reassembly) of pump and motors.
Install comprehensive online shaft vibration monitoring system.
Periodically determine ferrite level on pump casing exterior (thermal embrittlement).
Perform periodic surface and volumetric inspection of pump shaft.
PWR Control Rod Drive Mechanism Perform visual inspection of CROMs.
Perform electrical characteristics test to detect abnormal drive current requirements.
PWR Pressurizer and Surge Line Perform volumetric inspection of the spray and nozzle safe ends.
Install online transient monitoring system.
4-4
l Table 4,1 (Continued)
PWR Auxiliary feedwater Pumps (Motor and Turbine Driven)
D Install bypass piping to allow testing during operational periods.
J Install monitors for motor / turbine fault indications.
j Perform periodic detailed disassembly-inspection-overhaul-reassembly
~
of pump internals.
Implement a standard sequence of full-service testing.
3.
Typical ISTM Enhancements on Components Common to Both PWRs and BWRs Critical Concrete Structures (CCS)
Implement methods to inspect or remotely monitor the condition of reinforcing steel for corrosion.
Implement a program to identify and quantify degradation in reinforced and prestressed concrete.
Perform periodic boroscopic examination of exterior surface near penetration;.
Take core samples to determine material properties of concrete.
Inspect accessible concrete surfaces for freeze-thaw damage, calcium hydroxide leaching, and chemical attack.
Monitor temperature and radiation levels at penetrations and other strategic locations.
Monitor ground-water level, chemistry, and pH where lower containment concrete could be affected.
Monitor and evaluate the condition of pad.
Implement a crack mappin monitoring and analysis)g and growth monitoring program (periodic Establish and implement a long-term program of periodic visual condition survey of CCS.
Implement a vibration monitoring program.
Implement a program to verify concrete protective coating thickness.
Perform periodic evaluation of tendon condition.
Emergency Diesel Generators Monitor engine starting system for the following three functions:
Control current operation Engine cranking Fuel delivery Implement a vibration signature analysis program for diesels.
Develop actual loads and profile analysis for load shedding and load sequencing.
Develop an inspection program for windings to include megger result trending.
Implement a surveillance program for the turbocharger drive gearing.
AC and DC Electrical Cables and Buses (including medium voltage connectors and circuit breakers)
Install online circuit characterization system.
Use characterization system to develop and trend electrical signatures of safety critical circuits.
Develop and monitor temperature and radiation map for cable locations in containment.
Develop criteria for cable replacement in severe environments.
4-5 i
{
Table 4.1 (Continued)
Develop an integrated system for testing electrical and mechanical functioning of critical circuit breakers.
Add cable inspection to routine outage inspection requirements.
Inspection topics include: corroded terminals; brittle or cracked insulation; water in conduits /J boxes; physical damage of cables /
connectors; plugged weep holes.
Class 1E Station Batteries Perform loaded-battery cell voltage tests more frequently, i
Vary discharge current to enable cell resistance calculations.
Perform impedance measurements at various frequencies and calculate reactance.
Excite battery with white noise for indications of degradation mechanisms.
Analyze electrical noise generated by batteries under discharge conditions for indications of degradation.
Actuation and Instrumentation Channel Perform enhanced surveillance testing of all safety critical relays.
Increase scope of calibration and automatic actuation testing.
Hydraulic or Air-Operated Valves Install temperature sensors on cold side of normally closed valves for leak detection.
Install acoustic monitoring to detect valve leakage or degradation of stem packing.
Perform visual inspection of lines and reservoirs for signs of hydraulic fluid leakage or air system deterioration.
Safety-Relief Valves Install temperature sensors on cv-
,ide of normally closed valves for leak' detection.
Install acoustic monitoring to detect valve leakage.
Manual Valves Install temperature sensors on cold side of normally closed valves for leak detection.
Install acoustic monitoring to detect valve leakage or degradation of stem packing.
Check ValvesInstall temperature sensors on cold side of normally closed valves for leak detection.
Install acoustic monitoring to detect valve leakage.
Overhaul each safety check valve seat and hinge mechanism every outage.
Motor-Operated Valves Install temperature sensors on cold side of normally closed valves for leak detection.
Install acoustic monitoring to detect valve leakage or degradation of stem packing.
Install diagnostic system such as MOVATS.
Overhaul worst 20% at each outa e.
4-
F
[
U Table 4.1 (Continued)
Snubbers-Perform periodic enhanced qualification testing on snubbers rated at or below 50 KIPS.
"t Main and Critical Transformers Install combustible gas monitoring system on main and critical transformers.
Perform partial discharge measurements.
Inspect terminations and bushings.
!! cat Exchangers Perio1w11y t erGrm eddy-current testing of heat exchanger tubing.
Perit dica' sis i.erform hydrostatic testing of heat exchanger shell.
Perfo'm periodic shell thickness measurements.
Perfo.m periodic comprehensive efficiency test.
Fan Coolers / Chillers Perform visual inspection of chiller assembly.
Perform electrical inspection of motor.
Perform periodic vibration checks.
Source:
Reference 4.1.
- ISTM. activities marked with "*" were deemed to be sufficiently effective in detecting (aging degradation and thus are. candidates for inclusion as part of.
the developed safety-centered maintenance ISTM activities 4-7 j
This proposed action would also result in an incremental increase in surveil-lance, inspection, and maintenance activities.
The environmental impacts asso-ciated with repair, replacement, or refurbishment would be of the same magni-tude as those experienced during other maintenance or replacement activities conducted during the previous operation of the plant.
The modifications, repairs, and replacements undertaken in each plant under the proposed rule would not entail changes to the overall design of the plant.
Thus, basic plant operating parameters, such as thermal performance, power output, and fuel utilization, would not be expected to change during the renewal term.
Further, occupational exposure and both radiological and non-radiological releases from the plant are not expected to differ in magnitude from those experienced during operation prior to license renewal.
There are, however, two situations that could occur during the renewal process or during the renewal term at some plants that would result in operational changes.
The first involves the potential for increased outage time during either the renewal process or renewal term.
The second is the possible derat-ing of the power output of the plant.
The potential for increased outage time i
is due to the expanded scope of inspection, surveillance, test, and n.aintenance activities required either in conducting the integrated plant assessment or as a result of it.
Both the frequency and duration of periodic planned outages could increase to accommodate expanded ISTM requirements.
Derating a nuclear power plant lowers the maximum allowable power level for continuous operation.
A utility :ould elect to lower plant power level to extend the operating life of some major components as an alternative to costly repairs or replacements.
This could be considered 63 an option in cases where the anticipated length of the renewal term at the full-power level is short, for example, 5 to 10 years.
Licensees would have to decide on the merits of derating by weighing the avoided costs of major repairs ind replacements against the costs of replacement power, penalties in plant performance, and technical and safety considerations associated with operating the plant in a derated mode.
Examples of situations where plant derating might be selected over equipment repairs or replacements include:
Reducing reactor neutron flux to reduce pressure vessel embrittlement as an alternative to replacement or annealing.
Blocking out degraded portions of PWR steam generators as an alternative to their repair or replacement.
4.1.2 Relicensing Under Existing Rules Both the Atomic Energy Act and implementing regulations of the NRC provide that licenses may be renewed upon the expiration of the initial license term.
- Thus, the NRC may grant license renewals without the benefit of a license renewal rule.
Implementing this alternative would result in a case-by-case review of license renewal applications.
Decisions on individual plants reviewed in this manner would lead to the development of de facto regulatory procedures and criteria for license renewal.
The particular requirements of each case would create the need for additional regulatory guidance or criteria that cumulatively b(come part of the standards against which subsequent renewal applications would be. judged.
4-8
The existing regulation (10 CFR 50.51) allows the NRC to consider applications for license renewal.
Adoption of this alternative would result in the review of each application without the use of specific and uniform criteria for deter-mining renewal requirements.
Under this alternative, the plant license renewal requirements could be as minimal as allowing license renewal with no new safety or aging requirements or as extensive as requiring the licensees to meet stand-ards applicable to new plants at the time of license renewal application.
For example, the requirement in 10 CFR 50.34(g) calls for an evaluation of the facility against the standard review plan (SRP).
Such requirements would penalize older plants since they were not reviewed under the current version of the SRP.
A more likely scenario, however, would be that without specific guidance to the staff, case-by-case review of renewal applications and deri-sions on individual plants as they are presented to the NRC for review would lead to the development of de facto regulatory procedures and criteria for license renewal as experience is gained from each application review.
The widespread emphasis an aging degradation as the focal issue of plant life extension and license renewal would certainly imply that the same emphasis l
would be maintained in the de facto approach under the existing rules.
How-ever, without specific guidance, the manner in which the aging of components is handled could also be inconsistent from plant to plant if left to the dis-cretion of individual reviewers.
The particular requirements of each case would create the need for additional regulatory guidance or criteria that cumulatively become part of the standards against which subsequent renewal applications would be judged.
This is essentially what occurred in the time period before development of the standard review plan by the NRC staff.
There is reason to assume that relicensing requirements and standards under existing regulations would tend to converge on those in the proposed rule.
The i
widespread attention being given to aging degradation as the central technical concern for plant life extension and license renewal, both in this country and abroad, would make aging deg adation P. central concern of NRC in license renewal i
reviews.
NRC's activities invo M r.;, aging degradation were described in Chapter 1.
At this time it is unclear as to how the current licensing basis of a plant at the time of application would be considered and the extent to which existing effective programs would be given credit.
To the extent consid-eration is given to these two areas on an ad hoc basis, less credit may be given than b: the proposed rule.
It is thE conceivable that relicensing under existing rules would tend to result in increased ISTM and refurbishment and replacement relative to the proposed rule.
4.2 Environmental Impacts The potential for environmental effects from relicensing under the proposed h
rule has been assessed relative to the potential effects from relicensing under existing ragulations.
No basis was found for believing that the effects would differ significantly.
To the extent that there may be some differences in the requirements for ISTM and refurbishment and replacement, linkage between the activity conducted within the plant and support buildings and the external environment is limited.
The differences in relicensing requirements may result in differing worker exposure and generation of low-level radioactive waste.
To the extent that there would be differences, exposure and waste generation would tend to be lower under the proposed rule.
4-9
i I
I 4.2.1 Occupational Radiation Dose for Requirements Implemented at Time of License Renewal Worker exposure to radiation during special ISTM activities, which may be required in addition to those continued from the initial license term, has been estimated as part of the regulatory analysis of the proposed license renewal rule (Ref. 4.1).
The radiation exposure rate was assumed to be 0.004 person-rem / exposure hour.
The average worker exposure per plant was estimated to be 173 person-rems.
For comparison, the average collective occupational dose per plant in 1987 was 425 person-rems.
The total exposure resulting from special ISTM activities at all 118 plants is estimated to be about 20,400 person-rems.
Based on the cancer risk estimator (800 potential cancer fatalities per million person-rems; Ref. 4.2), this total exposure translates to about 16 potential cancer fatalities.
In comparison, about 15,000 cancer deaths due to causes unrelated to nuclear power plant o) era-tion would occur within the total work force of at least 75,000, assuming a)out 650 additional workers per plant to implement license renewal.
Implementing license renewal under existing regulations will also involve similar worker exposures The increased level of ISTM activities will be the result of resolving agin degradation concerns and implementing appropriate aging management activit es, as aging degradation issues are identified on an ad hoc basis.
Therefore, worker exposures due to relicensing under existing FuleiIwill be comparable to, or greater than, those resulting from the special ISTM activities pre planned and implemented as part of the aging management requirements of the proposed license renewal rule.
In order to extend the useful life of their plants, the licensees may also propose major realacements and upgrades of plant equipment.
These changes primarily would se based on the licensee's economic evaluation of the costs and benefits of life extension and the proposed term for a renewed license.
Examples of major replacements or upgrades, and worker exposures associated with such changes, are provided in Tables 4.2 and 4.3 for BWRs and PWRs, respec-tively.
These proposed changes will be reviewed by the NRC whether license renewal is implemented using the proposed rule or using the existing regula-tions; any mitigative actions resulting from such review and analysis would be the same in each case.
Based on the above considerations, occupational exposures from license renewal activities would not be expected to differ significantly between the alterna-tive relicensing regulations.
4.2.2 Population Radiation Dose for Routine Operation The airborne and liquid effluents released during normal operation translate into radiation dose to the general public through direct radiation from the plume, ground deposition, inhalation, and food consumption (Ref. 4.3).
Figure 4.1 shows a downward trend in population radiation exposure since 1977.
The public risk due to continued radiation exposure during the renewal term may be estimated by using the somatic (cancer) and ger.eric risk estimators and the projectedpopulationdoses.
The following estimators are used: 800 potential 4-10
. p.
-j b ) s.
Table 4.2 Estimated radiological impacts for boiling water reactor.
n.
upgrade items implemented at license renewal.
Occupational Exposure (person-rem)
' Older. Plants Newer Plants (24-month (12-month m~
l Activity.or Item outage) outage);
Replace pressure' vessel-2000 - 3000 or Anneal, pressure vessel 50 - 400 50 - 400
' Replace. safe ends 100 - 800 100 - 800 Replace, pressure vessel
'o internals 1 100 100 Replace recirculation piping 1600 - 1900 g
Replace recirculation:
pumps' 100 - 300 Replace recirculation system. valves 100 - 300
-Mirk I containment improvements:
50 - 1000 Replace. station b'atteries New control room-t New Class IE buildingL.
Replace one diesel generator Replace.30% of.electricale
' cabling 100 - 1000 100 - 1000 t
ap
- 7
+
-r i
3
! l1l. '
4-11 m..
5
().?
Table 4.3 Estimated radiological impacts for pressurized water reactor upgrade items implemented at license renewal.
Occupational Exposure (person-rem)
Older Plants Newer Plants (24-month (12-month Activity or item c.dge) outage)
Replace pressure vessel 2000 - 3000 or Anneal pressure vessel 50 - 400 50 - 400 Replace safe ends 100 - 800 100 - 800 Replace pressure vessel internals 100 100 Replace primary coolant pumps 100 - 300 Replace steam generators 1400 - 2000 Replace primary coolant piping stainless steel components 1000 - 2000 Ice condenser containment improvements 50 - 1000 Replace station batteries New control room New Class 1E building Replace one diesel generator Replace 30% of electrical ct.bli ng 100 - 1000 100 - 1000 4-12
t I
30 I
] 20-I tt Eb 10-
'i m
k 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Year Data compiled from: Baker. D. A, Population Dose Commitments Due to Radioecsive Rokases irom Nuckat Power Plant Slies. NUREGCR 2850. Vol 7,1988.
Figure 4.1 Total-body population dose from nuclear power plant effluents during normal operations.
4-13
deaths from cancer per million person-rems and 220 potential cases of all forms of genetic disorders per million person rems (Refs. 4.2 and 4.4).
The total annus1 population dose used in estimating the health effects is based on multiplying the last reported (1985) average individual total body dose coamit-ment per year (0.002 mrem) within 50 miles of a nuclear plant by the projected population (180 million) within the same distance of plant sites in the year 2030. The year 2030 is representative of the midpoints of 20-year renewal terms for the operating and planned nuclear plants.
The result of multiplica-tion is a projected value of 360 person-rems for the annual population dose from the continued operation of all nuclear plants.
Based on the above assump-tions, the health effects of extending the operation of all plants by 20 years are estimated to be one potential death from cancar, two potential cases of genetic disorders, and two cases of nonfatal cancer.
These estimates cover 20 years of additional operation at 74 nucicar plant sites.
The radiological impacts of the exteMed operation of plants may be compared with the incidence of actual cancer ihtalities and genetic oisorders within the exposed population due to causes unrelated to nuclear plant operations.
Multi-plying the projected population within 50 miles of nuclear plant sites by the current incidence of actual cancer fatalities (about 2W shows that about 36 million fatal cancer cases would be expected to deu M in this group of persons over their lifetimes (Ref. 4.5).
Also, the annual population dose due to extended power plant operation, estimated above at 300 person-rems, is negli-gible compared to the annual dose due to natural background radiation received by the same population, which will amount to about 18 million person-rems.
Therefore, the radiological risk of fatal cancer due to continued normal opera-tion of nuclear plants is insignificant.
Operating parameters are expected to be the same whether the operating license is renewed under the proposed rule or under existing regulations.
There is then no reason to anticipate that population radiation doses for routine operation would be different.
14.2.3 Occupational Radiation Dose for Routine Operation Most of the dose from routine operation to nuclear plant workers resuits from external exposure to radiation emitted by radioactive materials during the performauce of maintenance and inspection of primary coolant systems inside.the containeant.
Figure 4.2 shows the collective occupational radiation axposures from E !3 to 1987.
It exhibits a downward trend during the last 8 years; the avewe person-rem exposure per year for all plants has declined from 791 pemu-rems in 1980 to 425 in' 1987. The lower occupational exposures have been attributed to better chemistry and radiological controls and as-low-as-reasonably-achievable (ALARA) programs.
Better water chemistry control in the secondary system of PWRs reduces steam generator tube corrosion and tha need for more frequent inspections. The application of hydrogen water chemistry in BWRs mitigates intergranular stress corrosion in the primary system and'the need for inspection.
The major factors in higher radiation exposures at some plants.have been steam generator inspection, repair, and replacement in PWRs and primary system piping repairs and replacement in BWRs.
The collective occupational radiation dose to all nuclear plant workers due to 20 additional years of operation at each of 118 plants is expected to be about-1 million person-rems.
This is based on assuming the 1987 average collective occupational dcse of 425 person-rems per plant.
The 425 person-rem figure is 4-14
1000 800 -
5_
[ 600 -
sg 400 -
0
\\
1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Year l
Date complied from: Moeller, M.P., et al., " Historical Sumary of Occupational Radiation Exposure Experienced in U.S. Comercial Nuclear Power Plants," NUREG/CR-4160, April 1985.
4 Figure'4.2 -Occupational radiation exposure:
1973-1987.
i l
assumed because, although exposure is expected to decrease further because of improvements noted in the previous paragraph, exposure will increase somewhat because of enhanced ISTM requirements to accommodate potential aging.
- However, the increase should be similar for current and proposed regulations.
Multiply-ing this collective dose by the cancer risk estimator of 800 potential deatis from cancer per million person-rem exposure results in an estimate of about 200 additional cancer fatalities over the lifetime of the entire work force (approx-imately 78,000 workers).
About 16,000 fatal cancer cases would be expected to develop in this group over their lifetime from natural causes.
The risk of additional cancers is small compared to the incidence of naturally occurring cancers-and does not differ significantly between existing regulations and the proposed regulation.
The risk of potential genetic disorders caused by exposure of the work force is a risk borne by the progeny of this group of population and is thus properly considered as part of the risk to the general public.
An estimated one-third of the occupational radiation dose is received by workers who have offspring subsequent to the radiation exposure (Ref. 4.6).
Multiplying one-third of the total cccupational dose by the genetic risk estimator gives an estimate of 73 potential genetic disorders among the progeny of nuclear plant workers.
Adding this to the earlier estimate of two such disorders due to radiation exposure of the population surrour. ding the plants, about 75 cases of potential genetic disorders may occur in all future generations of the exposed population.
This increase should be about the same under the existing regulations and under the proposed rule.
This estimate may be compared with the risk of actual genetic disorders in future generations of the exposed population, including the nuclear plant work force, due to causes unrelated to nuclear plant operation.
Since-the mean per-sistence of the major types of genetic disorders is about 5 or 10 generations and the incidence of actual genetic disorders in each generation is about 11 percent (Ref 4.4), about 100 million genetic abnormalities are expected in the five generations of the population within 50 miles of nuclear plants (0.11 x 5 x 180 million).
The risk of genetic disorders due to radiation expo-sure during renewal terms of nuclear plants is therefore also insignificant compared to naturally occurring causes.
Most of the occupational radiation doses for routine operation received by workers are from maintenance and inspection of the primary coolant system.
Age-related degradation of this system would be a major concern under both the proposed rule and the existing rule.
Relicensing under either rule is expected to require an enhanced ISTM to manage age-related degradation.
The ISTM techniques and frequencies will be primarily dependent on the conditions and design of the primary coolant system. -Significant differences in occupa-
[
tional radiation doses are not expected between the proposed rule and the existing rule.
4.2.4 Severe Accidents Under the proposed license renewal rule, each licensee will be required to systematically identify important components and structures of the plant and to assess and manage the aging degradation of those components during the renewal term. These activities will preserve the operability of plant systems 4-16 l
that could initiate core damage accidents or of systems designed to prevent accidents or mitigate their consequences.
The potential for risk due to severe accidents would be mitigated since those areas in which risk might be increased because of plant aging would be addressed during the relicensing process and potential degradation of safety-related equipment would be mitigated.
Based on these considerations, the frequency of occurrence of a severe accident is not expected to increase during the renewal term of a plu,it.
Under existing regulations, it is likely that license renewal reviews would include consideration of severe accideilt risk from aging degradation.
This review would be expected to result in most of the same mitigative measures as under the proposed regulation.
The offsite consequences of a severe accident during the renewal term could be different from those at the time the initial license was granted because of changes in population and land use.
One of the principal offsite impacts'of a larg,e release of radioactive material is the latent cancers among the population near the plant.
The number of latent cancers is approximately proportional to the total exposed population.
An estimate of the impact on public risk due to severe accidents is provided by multiplying:
1.
Average frequency of latent cancer fatalities for the five plants evaluated in the NUREG-1150 study (approximately 0.01 per reactor year),
2.
Factor of 3 as an upper-bound adjustment for consistency A th BIER V risk l
- estimate, 3.
Factor of 1.2 to adjust this frequency estimate for the increase in population at a site from 1980 to 2030, 4.
The renewal term-(20 years), and I
5.
The number of plants (118).
3 The result is an estimate of 84 additional potential cancer fatalities that may occur with license renewal within the projected total population of 180 million living within 50 miles of all nuclear power plants in the year 2030.
In com-
)
parison, about 36 million cases of latent cancer fatalities will occur in the same population due to causes other than nuclear power operation.
The impact of license-renewal on public health due to potential severe accidents is insignificant and about the same under current and proposed regulations for l
3 s
4.2.5 Ecological Impacts 4.2.5.1 Requirements Implemented at Time of License Renewal
_ Terrestrial Ecosystem Impacts Impacts to terrestrial ecosystems principally arise from land disturbance dur-Ing construction that removes wildlife habitats from biologic production.
Most 4-17 a
1+
8 construction activities would likely take place within existing structures and facilitie.c, so the potential for extensive disturbance associated with excava-tion and site development is very low.
Also, similar activities are antici-pated under both the current and proposed regulations.
Disturbances occurring under typical conditions of the-proposed action are short-term increases in use of site acreage for laydown areas, the construction of temporary buildings and trailers to house contract personnel, and the use of some heavy equipment not typically found at plant sites during routine operations.
Impacts of these site disturbances will be site-specific, depending on the extent of plant modifications, their timing, and the physical characteristics of each plant site.
The' potential for adverse impacts on terrestrial ecosystems
. is minimal and about the same under the current and proposed regulations.
Aquatic Ecosystem Impacts Aquatic impacts will not differ in relicensing under the current regulations or under the proposed rule since no changes in plant systems that would affect entrainment, impingement, thermal discharges, biocide and other chemical dis-l -
charges, site runoff, water quality, or water use are anticipated.
4.2.5.2 Operation Terrestrial Ecosystem Impacts 0,nsite land use during the license renewal term would be the same whether plants are relicensed under the proposed rule or under current regulations.
Some additional land may be required for additional onsite fuel storage facil-ities.
The land occupied by these facilities in comparison to the total land area already occupied by the plant and its support facilities would have mini-mal additional impact on the terrestrial ecosystem.
The only additional terrestrial impact of plant operation under a renewal license would be the additional plant operating period.
Aquatic Ecosystem Impacts Power plants use large quantities of water for condenser cooling and lesser quantities of water for other cooling.
Most plants use adjacent surface water as a source of cooling water and receiving water for cooling systam discharges.
Potential environmental impacts associated with cooling systems ca,' result from impingement of aquatic organisms on water intake structures, entraine nt of organisms into the cooling system, use of chemical and other methods to control biofouling in the cooling system, and discharge of heated effluents into the receiving waters.
Entrainment is the process of aquatic organisms being pulled through the con-denser cooling system along with the cooling water.
The organisms most affected by entrainment include phytoplankton, zooplankton, drifting macroinvertebrates, and fish eggs and larvae.
Organisms or aquatic life that are affected by entrainment are damaged by a number of causes, including physical impact in the pump and condenser tubing, pressure changes caused by the flow or the pump-ing of cooling water, thermal shock in the condensers or the disch6rge stream, and chemical toxicity caused by antifouling agents.
4-18
I Impingement is the entrapment of larger aquatic life against the outer parts i
of the cooling water intake structure.
It is generally caused by the hydraulic forces of the intake stream as the flow passes through the screens or other
~
intake protection devices.
I Entrainment and impingement have been major concerns and will continue to be
- i studied.
Because of the passage of PL 92-500 and the implementation of Sec-i tion 316(b) of this Act, this environmental problem has been maintained at acceptable levels at existing sites.
Also, with the institution of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit system, Sec-tion 316(b) is continuously enforced through permit reissuance at least every 5 years and more frequently, if deemed necessary.
The NRC staff does not anticipate that this will be a significant future environmental issue.
Biofouling is a problem for every electric utility because tb
' isms are found in all aquatic environments--fresh water, marine, and a Biofoul-ing occurs when organisms, animal or plant, may be impinged o
.o and i
e grow on the condenser tubesheet and other power plant compone o.
in' oasic i
effects are reduced heat transfer, decreased flow, increased ba
- ressure, and accelerated corrosion.
Biofouling at nuclear power plants is a safety o
concern because of the potential for clogging or severe flow i striction of safety-related components of open-cycle service water systems.
'Certain developments are likely to occur by the time of license renewal that can affect.a plant 1 operator's activities with regard to biofouling control.
Federal and State regulatory agencies are increasingly concerned about all chemical discharges.
Although chlorination will continue to be a major n.athod 1
of biofouling control, it is highly probable that effluent limitations for chlorine residual products (such as trihalomethane) will be reduced compared to present limitations.
Increasingly stringent effluent limitations will often require utilities to adapt their present biofouling control to meet
~these new limitations.
Research will continue on new methods of biofouling control.
Whether by the use of chemicals other than chlorine, the development of better methods for using the chemicals, or the development of nonchemical control methods, many 3
utilities will very likely be required to add dechlorination systems to their effluent controls.
The development of any new method of biofouling control will require considerable expenditures.
Another factor that will affect the methods and costs of biofouling control at the time of license renewal is water quality The existing controls and new effluent limitations on effluents from all sovces will generally produce a higher water quality in the source water used by a power plant.
This can have a twofold effect on biofouling control.
A cleanei source will have increasingly stringent _ effluent limitations for all effluents.
n addition, the cleaner waters may allow for the reappearance of species not r esently occurring in more polluted waters, and such species can include organisms not presently seen as a biofouling problem at a particular location.
The need to dissipate excess heat is common to all nuclear power plants.
Many different systems are used to handle the excess load, including mechanical draft and natural draft cooling towers, cooling lakes and reservoirs, spray 4-19
canals, and once-through cooling.
All power plants must obtain an NPDES permit.
This permit sets the conditions for thermal effluents.
The 5 year cycle of the
' NPDES permit allows for modifications of effluent limitations.
License renewal would not cause any change in thermal effluents at a nuclear power plant compared with present thermal effluents unless the plant is derated.
Thermal discharge temperature and volume would be the same in the renewal term as in the original operating term since plant operating parameters would not change.
These would be a continuation of any environmental effects of thermal discharges experienced at all plants b" ~3re license re Nal for the additional period of time of the license renewal.
No difference a operating parameters is expected between relicensing under the proposed rule and the existing regu-lations; thus, the aquatic impacts would be the same.
4.2.6 Socioeconomic Impacts 4.2.6.1 Construction l
The socioeconomic impacts of construction associated with relicensing under I
the proposed rule are not expected to differ significantly from those that
(
would result from relicensing under the current regulations.
Generally, the same requirements relative to plant modifications, refurbishment, testing, and l-uonitoring are anticipated; thus, about the same size labor force would be L
required.
The range of community impacts associated with this labor force L
would be within the range of experience for major outages already encountered j
by a number of plants.
4.2.6.2 Operation Socioeconomic impacts of operation span a range of issues concerning the social, economic, and political well-being of community residents. These issues typically involve employment opportunities in both the public and private sector and services administered by Federal, State, and local govern-ment agencies.
The presence of a nuclear power facility creates opportunities for employment at the site, which in turn creates secondary opportunities to support facility operations.
Such opportunities include employment for housing and school construction, retail sales, and the creation of recreational facil-ities to accommodate a growing and diverse population.
All these activities provide direct inputs to the local economy.
This section addresses the exist-
)
ing socioeconomic conditions in terms of nmployment, wages, and tax revenues attributable to nuclear power facilities.
In terms of socioeconomic impact, operation of -plants in a renewal term whether licensed under the proposed rule or existing regulations would be similar to the operation during the initial operating term.
In both cases, direct employ-ment required for plant operation in the renewal operating term would be the same or slightly greater than in the initial operating term because of the requirement for more frequent surveillance and inspection as part of the aging management program.
Wages paid to plant personnel would not change because of license renewal since j
the plant would not operate differently in the renewal term.
Total wages paid could increase slightly if additional personnel are hired because of increased 4-20
1 inspection and surveillance requirements.
Money in the local economy could increase slightly because of more frequent visits of crews for maintenance i
-activities and increased plant expenditures for goods and services due to more i
.frequcnt surveillance, inspection, and maintenance activities.
State and local tax revenues are generally site-specific and can change in their level and tdistribution over time.
There is no reason to anticipate any differences in these effects between license renewal under the proposed rule-and the existing regulations.
4.2.7 Environmental Impacts of Decommissioning I
The environmental impacts of decommissioning are not expected to differ signifi-i cantly in relicensing under the proposed rule or under the current regulations.
Decommissioning procedures would not differ and the time of decommissioning would dif fer only s. lightly.
4.2.8 Economic Impacts on Utilities and Ratepayers Under the proposed rule and under current regulations, renewal of a plant operating license will not-alter the plant design basis or other plant operat-
- ing parameters and conditions.
During the renewal term, therefore, the plant wouldt operate in the same manner in which it operated during the initial
{
license term.
In both cases, there is expected to be added costs associated with preparing and. reviewing the license renewal application, added costs asso-i ciated with the ongoing ISTM effort, and costs ariociated with plant replace-ment and refurbishment to accommodate aging problems.
4.2.9 Spent Fuel Management The environmental-impacts of spent fuel storage do not significantly differ in relicensing under the proposed rule or under the current regulations, The fuel i
characteristics are not changed in either case. -To the extent that the pro-posed rule provides a climate of-regulatory stability, utilities may find
-relicensing more attractive for a greater portion of their plants, thereby leading to a greater volume of spent fuel to be stored over time.
The environ-cental impacts of spent. fuel storage, present and future, have been shown to be insignificant, as discussed below.
The NRC has assessed the environmental effects of spent fuel storage in numerous licensing = actions and two rulemakings.
Over 110 actions to provide additional reactor pool storage capacity through reracking have been assessed with no significant environmental impacts found.
The long-term integrity of spent fuel in wet storage, storage basins, and spent fuel storage pool components has been
.well. analyzed (Refs. 4.7 and=4.8).
Dry storage of spent fuel has also been assessed with no significant environmental impacts found.
Dry storage has been
' licensed by NRC at the H, B. Rabinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2, in South Carolina and the Surr,y Nuclear Station in Virginia.
An environmental assess-q ment of dry storaDe at the Oconee Power Station in South Carolina also resulted in a Finding of No Significant Impact.
The environmental assessment for an amendment to 10 CFR Part 72 (Liceica Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nudoar fuel and High-1.evel Radioactive Waste) assessed dry storage of spent fuel ~for G period of 70 years after receipt of spent fuel from a reactor 4-21
and found no significant environmental impact (Refs. 4.8 and 4.9).
Most re-cently the Commission's rereview of its waste confidence decision resulted in a proposed revision to 10 CFR 51.25(a) affirming, "... spent fuel generated in any reactor can be stored safely and without significant environmental impacts for at least 30 years beyond the licensed life for operation (which may include the term of a revised license) of that reactor at its spent fuel storage basin or at either onsite or offsite independent spent fuel storage installations" (54 FR 39765).
While the rule change continued to refer only to environmental impacts beyond the licensed life of reactors, the waste confidence review sup-porting the rule change did refer to considerable evidence of the general lat.k of environmental effects of fuel storage during the operating term (initial and renewed) of reactors (54 FR 39767).
4.2.10- Low-Level Waste Management Low-level radioactive wastes from nuclear power plants arise primarily from routine plant operation and maintenance activities and from repair, modifica-tion, or replacement of plant equipment.
Low-level wastes consist of solids and liquids that, after generation, are segregated by type, stabilized (liquids are reduced and concentrated by evaporation and mixing with solidi-fiers), reduced (solids are compacted), packaged, and transported to interim storage or to disposal sites.
Typical low-level waste (LLW) volumes from routine operations range from about 33,000 to 57,000 cubic feet per reference reactor year (RRY) for PWRs and BWRs, respectively (Ref. 4.10). Wastes typically consist of solidified (stabilized) and packaged liquids,-spent-recins, filter sludge, and compactable refuse.
Under the requirements of the Low Level Waste Policy Act of 1980 (PL 96-573),
responsibility for disposal of low-level radioactive wastes was transferred from the Federal government to each State. The Act encourages the formation of interstate compacts which, upon approval from Congress, may refuse to accept LLW from outside their respective compacts after January 1,1986 (Ref. 4.11).
Each State, or group of States, must site, develop, operate, and maintain its own LLW disposal facilities, subject to the licensing requirements of 10 CFR Parts 20 and 30.
Model LWR plants would typically require from 0.1 to 0.2 acre per year for dis-posal of LLW from routine operation only (Ref. 4.12).
Usin0 this acreage for the 40-year initial license term results-in 4 to 8 acres.of LLW burial area required per model LWR plant.
Extending the renewal term results-in total acreage of 6 to 12 for LLW disposal per plant, depending on reactor type, size, and length of renewal term.
License renewal would necessitate an approximately 50 percent increase in LLW storage capacity.
Issuing 40-year licenses for replacement capacity could double the required LLW disposal area allotted for routine operating wastes.
Additional national total area for routine LLW disposal would range from 650 to 1,300 acres for 20 year license renewal and up to 1,700 acres for 40-year licenses-for replacement nuclear plants.
During the total plant lifetime (original term plus renewal term), repair and replacement of some major plant components will likely take place.
Examples 4-22 u
Ib ll l
i include steam _ generators, primary loop piping, valves, pumps, and other hard-ware.
Some recent studies by PWR vendors indicate that disposal volumes asso-ciated with steam generator replacements range from about 37,000 to 58,000 cubic feet (Ref. 4.13).
Although major hardware replacements would not be specifi-cally required as conditions for license renewal, a decision by a licensee to operate a generating unit for more than 40 years could be a deciding factor in I
determining the hardware replacements of repairs undertaken.
License renewal under both the proposed rule and the existing regulations could result in increased volumes of irradiated components and materials requiring storage, transportation, and ultimate disposal at LLW burial sites.
The above estimates imply that 1 or 2 years of total LLW space per plant could be required as a minimum to accommodate wastes resulting from major maintenance and repair activities.
Sustained impacts of LLW disposal sites are the withdrawal of land from alterna-I tive use for periods of several hundred years and the emission of low levels of j
radiation, which results in personnel and public exposure.
There is no basis to believe that relicensing under the proposed rule will significantly alter the nature or volume of the low-level wastes that would be generated otherwise, i
1 i
l 4-23
i REFERENCES FOR CHAPfER 4 4.1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), " Regulatory Analysis for Proposed Rule on Nuclear Plant License Renewal," NUREG-1362, Draft for Comment, July 1990.
4.2 Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations (BEIR V), " Health Effects of Exposures to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation,"
National Academy of Science / National Research Council, 1990.
'4. 3 D. A. Baker, " Population Dose Commitments Due to Radioactive Releases from Nuclear Power Plant Sites," Annual Reports 1979-1985, NUREG/CR-2850,-
PHL-4221, Vol s. 1-7, 1982-1988.
4.4 Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations (BEIR I:1) "The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation," National Academy of Science / National Research Council, July 1980.
4.5 Americar-Cancer Society, " Cancer Facts and Figures," 1978.
.4.6 International Commission on Radiation Protection, " Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiation Protection," Publication 26, January 1977.
4.7 W. J. Bailey et al., " Surveillance of LWR Spent Fuel in Wet Storage,'
Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), NP-3765, October 1984.
4.8
" Result of Studies on the Behavior of Spent Fuel in Storage," Journal of the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management, Vol. XVI, No. 3, April 1988.
4.9 C. S. Schulten, " Environmental Assessment for 10 CFR Part 72, ' Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Fuel-and High-Level Radioactive Waste,'" NUREG-1092, August 1984.
4.10 U.S. Department of Energy, " Integrated Data base for 1986:
Spent Fuel and Radioactive Waste Inventories, Projections and Characteristics," 00E/
RW-0006, Rev. 2, 1986.
4.11
.B. Siskind et al., " Extended Storage of Low-Level Radioactive Wastes; Potential Problem Areas," Brookhaven National Laboratory, NUREG/CR-4062, BNL-NUREG-51841, December 1985.
4.12 USNRC, " Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of
. Nuclear Facilities," NUREG-0586,1986.
4.13 L. R. Katz, "The Plex Aspects of Storage and Disposal of Replaced Nuclear Components," Proceedings of the Conference on Nuclear Power Plant Life Extension (Snowbird, Utah), 1988.
4-24
i l
5.
CONCLUSIONS-1 License renewal-is permitted under the Atomic Energy Act and.NRC regulations.
1
=The proposed action in this environmental assessment is to set forth the proce-i dures _and requirements for utilities to submit license Lrenewal applications and to: provide _the standards for staff review and approval of the applications in a new proposed 10--CFR Part 54.
The staff has reviewed the possible differences.
t!
in: requirements _for license renewal under the proposed rule and -under the exist-i Ling _ regulations and the environmental-significance of these differences.
Both l approaches to relicensing would emphasize the identification and mitigation of aging. degradation of systems,= structures, and. components Requirements'under both approaches would be-similar.
Major areas of the_ environment were examined to determine whether any differences in possible impacts existed between the 1
two-approaches'to~ relicensing.
No significant impacts were identified.
l
_p i
r I
1
'l.
k 1
w i
5-1
APPENDIX
)
ENVIR0h'1 ENTAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED RULE ALTERNATIVES CONSIDE9ED The NRC has-considered four alternative ways to further define its requirements for license renewal.
They differ in terms of the safety review standards and the scope of technical assessment and information that would be required of the licensees in support of license renewal applications.
The four safety review alternatives for license renewal are those that have been evaluated for their values and impacts in the regulatory analysis for the proposed rule (Ref. A.1).
There are significant differences among the alterna-j tives with respect to the scope of safety review required to support license renewal.
The differences among the alternatives regarding the environmental review are not significant.
A.
License Renewal Using Current Licensing Basis With No Additional Requirements This alternative is based on the use of the plant current licensing basis as the safety review standard.
It would impose no additional requirements.for license renewal other than those that were applied to the plant during the initial term of operation.
This alternative is based on the assumption that current and future NRC regula-tions and programs will be adequate to ensure safety throughout extended opera-tion.
As technical issues affecting plants due to extended operation are identified, adoption of this alternative would assume that these issues will be resolved and corrective actions taken.
Thus, the NRC would assume that its r
aging research and inspection programs.and the licensee maintenance and surveil-I lance programs would address potential aging concerns without the need for formal plant aging evaluations prior to issuing a renewal license.
B.
License Renewal Using Current Licensing Basis With Requirement for Assessment and Management of Aging (Proposed Action)
Alternative B is also based on the use of the plant current licensing basis as the safety review standard but in addition would require a formal comprehensive aging assessment and management effort by all licensees at the time of license renewal. The approach is to require licensees to assess continued aging through-out the renewal term and to account for aging in the operation, surveillance, and maintenance of the plants.
This alternative's requirements are as follows:
To assess continued aging throughout the renewal term to ensure that aging o
does not compromise the performance of safety-significant components.
A-1
r i
To account for aging in the operational, surveillance, and maintenance procedures of the plant.
C.
License-Renewal Extending Proposed AcHon to Raquire Assessment Against Selected New-Plant Standards This alternative expands the scope of safety review from that of Alternative B to address design and operational issues that go beyond aging concerns.
In addition to satisfying the aging requirements specified under Alternative B, the licensee would be required to satisfy the intent of safety acceptance criteria used for new plants (at the time of submitting the renewal application) in specific selected areas identified in advance by the NRC.
These selected safety review areas would be derived from the NRC standard review plan (SRP),
t which embodies the regulatory standards applicable to new operating licenses (Ref. A.2).
The detailed list of additional safety review areas is yet to be determined.
The requirements for this alternative are:
The licensee will follow all Alternative B requirements to assess and manage aging.
n The licensee will identify and assess discrepancies between the current l
-design-of the plant and selected aspects of the licensing basis for new plants as embodied in the SRP-For those areas in which discrepancies are identified, the licensee will propose hardware, operational, or procedural changes or will supply addi-tional analysis.
Supporting information, such as probabilistic risk assessment or-deterministic analysis, will be provided to demonstrate that the discrepancy is not safety significant-and thus may be granted an exemption from the regulations as speci-fied in 10 CFR 50.12 or that a change in plant design or. operating procedures will resolve the discrepancy.
D.
License Renewal Extending Proposed' Action to Require Compliance With All New-Plant Standards In addition to satisfying the aging requirements specified under Alternative B, Alternative D would require the licensee to demonstrate compliance with all standards'that apply to operating licenses for new plants at the time of the license renewal application.
It would ensure that the design standards of new f
plants are fully incorporated into plants with renewal licenses.
The current SRP and other relevant guidance referenced by the proposed rule (regulatory guides and industry codes and standards) would be used as a basis for the design review of plants whose licenses are to be renewed.
In evaluat-ing the plant against safety acceptance criteria provided in the SRP, the licensee will apply the same deterministic safety analysis methodology that is used in current licensing of nuclear plants.
A-2
1 The requirements for this alternative:
Follow all of Alternative B requiremend to assess and manage aging, Are similar to the second requirement of Aiternative C except that the licensee will be required to review the plant design against all safety acceptance criteria specified in the SRP, and Are the same as third requirement of Alternative C.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED ACTION i
A.
Current Licensing Basis With No Additional Requirements (Alternative A)
This alternative is based on the assumption that NRC regulations and programs that apply to plants in their initial term of operation will be adequate to ensure safety throughout extended operation.
As technical issues affecting plants due to extended operation are identified, adoption of this alternative assumes that they will be resolved and corrective actions taken.
Thus, the NRC aging research and inspection programs and the licensee maintenance program will be assumed to address potential aging concerns without the need for formal plant aging evaluations prior to issuing a renewal license.
Also, in the future, the NRC may identify the need for new regulations and guid-ance to address aging issues for specific components.
This could arise from the efforts of the Nuclear Plant Aging Research (NPAR) program and the work being carried out under the auspices of the various professional societies to revise the applicable codes and standards for extended service life of elec-trical, mechanical, and structural components.
The resolution of aging problems would be required as a backfit for all plants when identified as a safety con-cern.
This applies to plants in their initial term of operation as well as in their renewal term.
The demonstration of continued compliance with current regulations will require the licensees ~to evaluate the qualification of certain equipment (limited to that which is covered in the current regulations) for extended service.
It would also require licensees to submit supporting technical information as part of the-license renewal application.
Under this alternative, plants would continue to operate under their current licensing basis as amended during the initial operating license terms or during their renewal terms.
No-specific requirements for plant assessment of aging effects, or programs of enhanced inspection, surveillance, testing, and main-tenance (ISTM) would be a condition for license renewal.
Effects of aging would be addressed as they arise or as regulations evolved before or during any license renewal term.
Since changes '.o the plant licensing basis would not be required as a condition for license renewal under this alternative, plant operating practices and para-meters, in general, would not be expected to change from those that occurred during the initial operating license term.
Consequently, there would be no significant changes to operating parameters such as the volume of cooling water required, temperature of cooling water released, or the type and amounts of A-3
4 spent fuel and low-level radioactive waste produced due to plant operation in
- the renewal term.
Environmental Impacts The environmental impacts associated with construction would be of the same magnitude as those experienced during other maintenance or replacement activi-ties conducted during the previous oparation of the plant.
Nonradiological impacts and radiological releases would continue with little change because the fundamental operating characteristics of the plant would not be altered.
The only impact would be that associated with the additional years of release due to extended plant life.
There would be some increase in occupational exposures as plant components that may require modification, repair, or replacement are identified during the extended life of the plant.
The impact of plant modifications under this alter-native should be equivalent to those of tht proposed action.
This impact was calculated to be about 120,000 person-rems for all of the 118 plants that could eventually receive authorization for extended operation.
Using a conversion of 900 potential cancer fatalities per million person-rems, 120,000 person-rems equates to about 96 potential additional cancer fatalities for the nuclear power plant work force..
There is potential for increased risk of severe accidents if plant aging con-cerns are not adequately addressed.
The draft regulatory analysis for the license-renewal rule (Ref. A.1) estimates that core damage frequency, under this alternative, could increase by as much as 1.6E-3/ year if plant aging con-cerns are not adequately addressed.
Even if this maximum increase occurred,
'the corresponding potential increase in radiation dose to the public from a core damage accident (that leads to containment failure) over a 20 year renewal period would only be about 28,000 person-rems for a typical plant.
This trans-lates to about four additional potential cancer deaths in the population within a.50-mile radius of.a nuclear power p1 ant.
The currently available estimate of risk increase due to aging was developed from studies conducted to classify and to set priorities for components and structures in the NRC aging research program.
It is not based nn modeling the effects of aging into probabilistic risk assessments, nor does it employ a comprehensive component failure data base. The NRC currently is reviewing its present regulations and regulatory. guidance to determine their effectiveness in addressing plant aging concerns for the renewal term.
This ongoing work will improve the basis for estimating risk due to aging.
Environmental Impacts of Decommissioning The impacts of decommissioning under this alternative would be similar to those of the proposed action.
Economic Impacts On Utilities and Ratepayers Renewal of a plant operating license under this alternative would not alter the plant design basis or other plant operating parameters and conditions.
During A-4
.the renewal term, the plant would operate in the same way that it operated dur-ing the initial term.
Except for the added costs associated with preparing and revieving the license renewal application and with as yet unspecified plant modifications to accommodate aging problems that are identified as operation continues, the economic costs associated with this alternative will be similar to those encountered during operation prior to license renewal.
Spent Fuel Management The impacts will be essentially the same as for the proposed action discussed in Section 4.2.9.
Low-level Waste Management Under this alternative ne more low-level radioactive waste will be generated t~an under the proposed action.
This issue is discussed in Section 4.2.10.
n D.
License Renewal With Assessment Against Selected New-Plant Standards (Alternative C)
With this alternative, the scope of the safety review is increased to include plant design and operational issues not considered in the assessment and manage-ment of aging concerns.
As with the proposed action, this alternative will require the licensee to assess continued aging throughout the renewal term and to account for aging in the operational and maintenance plans of the facility.
In addition, the plant licensee will be required to satisfy the intent of safety acceptance criteria used for new plants (at the time of submittint, the renewal application) in specific selected areas identified in advance by the NRC.
These selected safety review areas will be derived from the NRC standard review plan, which contains the regulatory standards applicable to new operating licenses.
In' addition to plant changes that are necessary to address aging concerns, hardware modifications would be required for some plants to meet selected new plant standards.
Modifications necessary to plant equipment and facilities for license renewal cannot be predicted since they have not yet been identified by the NRC.
Also they would be specific to each plant based on the findings of a systematic review.
The results of recent NRC investigations of the significance to plant safety of the differences in design between older plants and current newer plants can serve as indicators of the general types of modifications that might be required for license renewal under this alternative.
-The process that might take place to determine which new plant standards must be incorporated at a plant to qualify for license renewal would be parallel to a previous NRC program, called the Systematic Evaluation Program (SEP).
This program was conducted by the NRC and the licensees. It should be noted, how-ever,-that the experience obtained through the SEP might not be directly appli-cable to license renewal because the 10 nuclear plants in the SEP all predated the standard review plan (SRP).
Post-SRP plants included many of the design requirements that encompass the current design basis.
Nevertheless, the SEP l
A-5
e serves as an example'of the scope of plant modifications that might be required under this alternative.
The SEP was carried out to determine the extent and significance of differences among the design bases of 10 older operating nucleer units and the current SRP, which is the current design basis for new plants.
The program objective was to document and confirm the safety of the 10 plants.
Results of the effort revealed areas for each plant in which some SRP requirements were not being met.
Using risk screening criteria that were developed based on limited, system level, probabilistic risk assessments, the risk significance of each identified difference from the SRP was determined for each plant.
Using this analysis, plant modifications necessary to correct the deficiencies were identi-fied and prioritized based on the significance of each to continued safe opera-tion of the plant. The participating utilities implemented those modifications of highest priority at each plant.
Table A.1 summarizes the hardware-related plant modifications that resulted from the SEP at three of the participating plants (Millstone 1, Palisades, and San Onofre 1).
Examination of the modifications to plant f acilities and equipment that may occur as a result of this alternative shows that no significant changes to plant operating conditions would be likely to result from these modifications.
Plants would operate the same in the renewal term as in the initial operating term.
There would be no changes in plant parameters, such as in the volume of cooling water required, temperature of the cooling water released, and types and amounts of radioactive effluents, solid wastes, spent fuel, and nonradio-active waste products.
Environmental Impacts-The potential for nonradiological effects would be about the same at plants under this alternative as for the proposed action.
There is a potential for somewhat more construction because of the added requirements to comply with selected new plant standards.
Land required, however, should not exceed that already disturbed during original plant construction since overall activities would still be less than during original construction and would likely be internal to the plant rather than external.
Renewal of plant operating licenses under this alternative would not alter the major plant operating parameters or conditions.
The potential impacts of rou-tine operation during the renewal term would be the same as those discussed for the proposed action.
Under this alternative, plant changes will be required to meet selected new-plant standards.
Since specific modifications to comply with these standards have not yet been identified, the associated radiation exposures can be only grossly approximated.
In the regulatory analysis of the license renewal rule (Ref. A.1), the estimated additional occupational exposure, relative to the proposed action, ranges from about 40 person-rems per plant to 550 person-rems per plant.
The upper bound applies to those plants where a large fraction of the modifications will take place in highly radioactive areas.
This dose is equivalent to about one to nine additional cancer fatalities over the lifetime of the nuclear plant work force, based on 108 nuclear reactors potentially seeking license renewal.
A-6
Table A.1 Summary of hardware-related modifications resulting from Systematic Evaluation Program reviews of three nuclear power plants.
{
SAN ON0FRE 1 Install grade beams to span the backfill soil beneath safety-related structures and components.
Make unspecified seismic design modifications.
Touch up paint on reactor coolant pumps, containment hatch door, and HVAC recirculation fans.
Remove coating of surface rust on piping.
Recoat HVAC equipment exterior surfaces.
Install locking devices for the refueling water supply line.
Provide automatic termination of the feedwater safety injection flow on low refueling water storage tank level.
Relocate air horn and provide drip proof cover for emergency core cooling system.
Installpowerinterruptdevicesonsafetyinjectionsystem.
Reroute power cables for emergency core cooling system.
Provide physical separation of vital buses for emergency core cooling 4
system.
Install new tank of condensate water for auxiliary feedwater that is i
Seismic Category 1.
Replace existing relays of the degraded grid voltage with coincident logic.
Remove tsunami gat 1s to ensure that tsunami-induced valve failure will not contribute to salt water cooling system unavailability.
Install a dedicate! safe shutdown system consisting of a new diesel generator (non-saf!ty related) and associated switchgear and transfer i
switches.
Install a remote slutdown panel for process instrumentation and controls.
Provide a third tr:in (motor-driven) of auxiliary feedwater to prevent single failure of the pump.
-MILLSTONE 1 I
Install scuppers on roofs of the turbine building, reactor building, i
warehouse, and heating and ventilation areas.
Modify doors of the floodwalls to ensure adequate design for flooding events.
Remove handrails obstructing floodgates.
Replace flood door gaskets.
Provide a connection to the e.derground city water system and a missile-protected pump in the reactor building to supply additional cooling water to the isolation condenser.
Modify the anchoring system of the condensate storage tank and firewater tank.
A-7
i Table A.1 (Continued)
Install recirculation pump. snubber supports.
Modify pipe supports for seismic purposes.
Install an independent pressure interlock for activator of the reactor water cleanup system-relief valve.
Incorporate degraded grid voltage protection.
Modify the gas turbine generator start logic to bypass excitation trips.
Modify five gas turbine generator output breaker protective trips.
Modify electrical supplies for the feedwater and feedwater coolant
~
injection area coolers for automatic sequencing onto a gas turbine generator.
Modify the power supply for the intake structure exhaust fans to allow automatic sequencing of one fan onto a gas turbine generator and tb other onto a diesel generator.
PALISADES Modify the main steam isolation valves / main steam line configuration to make it single failure proof to alleviate potential for two steam generator blowdown events.
Automate and add.a third pump to the auxiliary feedwater system.
Change manual isolation valve in the containment isolation system to power operated.
Modify threaded pipe connectors in the containment isolation system.
Place block valves in front of threaded caps on various containment penetrations or weld caps.
Add qualified isolation devices on the steam generator A and B pressure channels ~and on the reactor coolant flow channel going to the plant computer.
Instal 1 another level sensor to the component cooling _ water surge tank and its indicator in the control room.
~ Replace one 26-inch manhole cover with a grated cover to increase drainage flow.
Add fans to provide cooling to invertor cabinets, charger cabinets _, and-auxiliary feedwater junction boxes.
A-8
}
The additional requirements to comply with selected new plant standards may potentially reduce the risk of severe accidents.
Estimates of core damage fre-quency reduction in the draft regulatory analysis of the license renewal rule (Ref. A.1) indicate that risk reductions for the 10 plants reviewed under the NRC Systematic Evaluation Program ranged from 7.1 x 10 6 core damage per year to 2.9 x 10 4 core damage per year.
The regulatory analysis uses the lower value of 7.1 x 10 6 as the best estimate of risk reduction for this alterna-tive relative to the proposed action.
The principal reason for this assump-tion is that past and ongoing programs, including SEP, generic safety issue resolution, individual plant examinations, and backfits associated with rules such as station blackout, have reduced the potential for further risk reduc-tion.
If the additional requirements of this alternative were to result in a reduction in core damage frequency of 7.1 x 10 5 for a typical plant, the reduction in public dose would amount to 1,240 person-rems over a 20 year renewal term.
This represents less than 1 percent reduction in radiation exposure due to severe accidents relative to not modifying to new plant standards.
Environmental Impacts of Decommissioning The impacts of decommissioning under this alternative would not be different from trose of the proposed action since plant operation in the renewal term would be the same.
Spent Fuel Management The impacts will e essentially the same as for the proposed action discussed in Section 4.2.9.
Low-Level Waste Management Under this alternative there is a potential -for a greater amount of refurbish-Cent and plant modifications and consequently more associated low-level radio-active waste.
This issue is discussed in Section 4.2.10.
l C.
License Renewal With Compliance With All New-Plant Standards (Alternative 0)
In order to receive a renewal license with this alternative, the licensee's plant must be in compliance with all standards that apply to operating licen-ses for new plants at the time of the license renewal application.
The licensee must also carry out a program for the assessment and management of aging.
The NRC SRP and the guidance referenced in it (regulatory guides and industry codes and_ standards) would be used as a basis for the design review of plants for which a renewal license is requested.
Under this alternative, nuclear units would have to meet all applicable licens-ing standards and requirements in effect at the time of license renewal.
This overall requirement could be met through a combination of refurbishment of existing plant systems, components, and structures and/or the addition of new safety systems as backfits.
These modifications would be in addition to those undertaken specifically to address aging effects.
A-9
I The modifications needed to meet new plant standards cannot be predicted and would depend on the circumstances of each plant at the time of e newal.
The modifications, however, are likely to be extensive.
Examples include:
- Addition of redundant trains in safety-related systems, such as auxiliary feedwater systems.
Addition of switchgear and cabling associated with emergency power supplies as required from station blackout considerations.
Rearrangement of equipment to meet fire protection standards or to reduce the possibility of adverse system interactions in plant transient conditions.
Modifications of these types have the potential for requiring concomitant changes in interfacing systems and structures so that piant construction activ-ities could extend beyond those required to make the identified licensing basis changes.
While considerable rebuilding and modifications of power plants may be required under this alternative, no changes to plant operating conditions would likely result.
The plant would operate the same in the renewal operating term as in the initial operating term. There would be no changes in such plant parameters as the volume of cooling water required, temperature of the cooling water released, and the types and amounts of spent fuel and radioactive waste produced.
Environmental Impacts Collective dose would be at the high end of the estimates given in Tables 4.2 and 4.3, considering that up to 950 additional workers per plant may be needed to perform hardware mouifications consistent with new plant standards.
The 1,930 person-rem upper limit radiation dose noted in Table 4.3 equates to the equivalent of about 1.5 cancer fatalities per plant.
The regulatory analysis of the license renewal rule (Ref. A.1). identified 63 plants (23 BWRs and 40 PWRs) as high cost plants based on design basis used, design features, and operating experience to date.
If the above assumptions were applied to these plants alone, an additional 94 cancer fatalities, relative to the proposed action, may be expected under this alternative.
Another method of estimating this same impact places the impact at 12.8 cancer fatalities per plant or 806 total.
These figures are derived by multiplying
~ 1,000 workers per plant by two years by 2,000 working hours per year by average dose of 0.004 person-rem per hour to obtain 16,000 person-rems, which equates to y! '
about 12.8 cancer fatalities per plant.
Renewal of a plant operating license under this alternative may potentially change the plant operating parameters or conditions.
The potential radiolog-ical-impacts of routine operation during the renewal term should be similar to those discuss'd for the proposed action.
The more stringent requirement of meeting all new plant standards, as called for in this alternative, may further reduce the risk of severe accidents.
The
-draft regulatory analysis for the license renewal rule (Ref. A.1) assumed that A-10
1 the risk reduction for this alternative is 3 x 10 4 core damage per year rela-
~tive to the proposed action.
The modifications that may be needed to a plant
'under this alternative will depend upon its specific design.
A risk reduction
.of the amount stated above translates to 5,220 person-rems avoided dose to the public= and plant workers for a typical plant over a 20 year renewal term or about 2.5 percent reduction in radiation exposure due to severe accidents relative to not modifying to new plant standards.
Environmental Impacts of Decommissioning
[
The' impacts of decommissioning under this alternative would not be different from those discussed for the proposed action since plant operation in the renewal-term would be the same.
Spent Fuel Management j
.The impacts will be essentially the same as for the proposed action discussed 4
-in Section 4.2.9.
Low-Level Waste Management 1
Under this alternative a greater amount of low-level waste would be generated
- i because of plant modifications-and refurbishment.
This issue is discussed in Section 4.2.10.
j l
i A-11
.g.,
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX A.1 U.S.' Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), " Regulatory Analysis for Proposed Rule on Nuclear Plant License Renewal," NUREG-1362, Draft for Comment, July 1990.
A.2 USNRC, " Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants, LWR Edition," NUREG-0800, July 1981.
o et i
i I
-A-12
Ngem m u.s. Nucts An atout AToaY cowMissioN ij g,.
EIUM BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET
~~
"~
<s,,,ng,,,a on en,,,"'"'
L TO LI A'(U LUbiti LL Environmental Assessment for Proposed Rule-on Nuclear Power PlantfLicense Renewal:
Draft Report for Comment 3
oATE ataca' Poousnto July j 1990 em 6
4 f iN OH GR ANT NUMBt R
- b. AUI*tONis; 6 TYPt OF REPORT Regalatory t
- 1. Pt HIOD COv i H t D emcium, o res tl Pt HFOHMENG GANilAT DON ~ N AML AND ADOhlbs in kNc. prove or, won. ortav ar nosson. V5 kakar nwurers cosanuwon. nne awkny sorn or rannacwr oro,w DTvElon of ' Safety issue Resolution Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
' Washington, DC 20555 9, $PONSOHING OHO ANil ATiON - N Avt AND ADO R t SS sit NRC, avec h ei eteve', it contru for ow=Je 48C Devasoa. D'(av er Reven. US Nace*r ****dateo Co*mamo.
- ondnweaseenest6 Same as above 10, SUPPLt' MENT ANY NOTES 11 ABS T H ACT (Joa nete er mak The possible environmental effects of promulgating nuclear power plant license renewal s.tandards by the proposed rule,10 CFR Part 54, rather than applying requirements in an ad : hoc manner in individual licensing actions, are assessed. The rule requires the dev'eTopment of information and analyses to identify aging problems of systems, structures,
,andLcomponents that will be of concern during the renewal term and will not be con-
' trolled by existing regulatory programs.
Required actions may be replacement, refurbishment, inspection, testing or monitoring. Such actions will generally be within the range of'similar ' actions taken for plants during the initia; operating term.
.They would be primarily confined within the plants with potential for only minor disruption to the environment.
It is unlikely that these actions would change the operating conditions of plants in ways that would change the environmental.ef fects lalready being experienced. The promulgation of 10 CFR Part 54 has clear advantages relative to regulatory stability and administrative efficiency. However it will not result in environmental effects significantly different from those arising from relicensing under existing regulations. The NRC concludes that promulgation of 10 CFR Part 54 would not significantly affect the environment and, therefore, a full
' environmental impact statement is not required and a finding of No Significant Impact can be made.
t 2, Kk V WORDS/Ot SCH:P I OH $ ft us wohh er phs.ucs ther esti amu avie4rreras as Jotetsag to, reporr. i 11 A w As 6 Atis Li I
- b I A I t Mt N i
- ' environmental assessment unlimited environmental impact a ~imA=~~~
license renewal u mi,,,,,
nuclear power plant onclassirind (fhu Ntoorrh uncl a s si fi nd Itt NUMBt h OF PAGES 16 PHICE NRC F ORM JJS p 891
- f'
2
' UNITED STATES nan cass wais i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'oSS,',*J' 5 '*'0
)
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 e
rinvit he o o
{
OFFICIAL BUSINESS I-PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. 0%
c a.
+
k c
i I3 5i 4'
Cn:
tfi -
- 7. -
m It3 -
h.c t,
D
.