ML20065T637
| ML20065T637 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 12/12/1990 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20065T639 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9012280301 | |
| Download: ML20065T637 (3) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _
7590 01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION
$0 JERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY DOCKET !!O. 50-219 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDINGOFN0_SIGNIFICAIT_IMPgi The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC or the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to Provisional Operating License No.
OPR-16 issued to GPU Nuclear Corporation, et. al. (the licensee), for operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, located in Ocean County, New Jersey.
ENVIRONMENT ASSESSMENT Identification of_ Proposed _ Action:
The proposed amendment would revise the Provisional Operating License No.
DPR-16, License Condition 2.C.(7) to accommodate implementation of a 21-month operating cycle with a 3-month outage or a 24-month plant refueling cycle for the core spray spargers surveillance.
The proposed amendment is in accordance with GPU Nuclear Corporation's application dated September P1, 1990.
The remainder of the application will be acted upon at a later date.
! lee _d_for the Proposed Action:
The proposed change to the Provisional Operating License is needed so that surveillance requirements for the core spray spargers is extended to 9012280301 901212 19 ADOCKOD0gg PDR P
, accorrnodate a 21-month operating cycle with a 3-month outage or a 24-month plant refueling cycle.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The Comission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revision to
/
Provisional Operating License No. DPR-16, License Condition 2.C.(7).
The proposed revision would accommodate implementation of a 21-month operating cycle with a 3-month outage or a 24 month plant refueling cycle for the Oyster Creek core spray spargers surveillance.
The surveillance interval is presently 20 months.
Based on its review, the Commission concludes that the prcposed change is acceptable. The staff has determined that the proposed chante wes not alter uny initial conditions assumed for the design basis accidents previously evaluated nor change operation of safety systems utilized to mitigate the design 4
basis accidents.
The proposed change does not increase the probability or consequences of accidents.
No changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in tha gliowable indi-vidual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Accordingly, toe Conrnission concludes that proposed action would result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the prnposed change to the License involves one component in the plant which is located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 It does not affect nonradio-logical plant effluents and has no other environmental impacts.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
l
3 A1_ternatives to the Proposed Action:
Since the Cormiission concluded that there are no significant environmental effects that would result from the proposed actions, any alternativts with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be evaluated.
Alternative _Use of Resources:_
The action would involve no use of resources not previously considered in the final Environmental Statement (FES) for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station dated December 1974 Agen_cie_s and Pe_rsons Consulted:
The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDihG OF NO SIGNIFICA_NT IMPACT The staff has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the application for amendment dated September 21, 1990, which is available for public inspection in the Comission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20555 av! the Ocean County Library, Reference Department, 101 Washington Street. Toms River, New Jersey 08753.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 12th day of December,1990.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/
/
p f
J b% J '
John F. Stolz Director fWectDireclorateI-4 kWlsionofReactorProjects-1/II Odfice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
__