ML20071Q257
| ML20071Q257 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 08/09/1994 |
| From: | Matthews D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20071Q260 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9408110147 | |
| Download: ML20071Q257 (4) | |
Text
!
1 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO,!{
SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY I
SOUTH CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE AUTHORITY VIRGIL C. SUMMER NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET N0. 50-395 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l
l The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering l
l issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. NPF-12 issued to l
Scuth Carolina Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) for operation of the l
l Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No.1, located in Fairfield County, South Carolina.
l ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action The proposed amendment would include provisions in Technical Specifications (TS) 3/4.9.12, Spent Fuel Assembly Storage; 5.3, Reactor Core; and 5.6, Fuel Storage; that would allow for the use and subsequent storage of fuel with an initial enrichment to 5.0 weight percent (w/o) Uranium-235 (U-235) and with a final burnup of up to 48000 megawatt days per metric ton uranium (MWJ/MTU).
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated December 13, 1993, as supplemented February 2, 1994, and March 11, 1994.
The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed changes, are needed so that the licensee can use higher fuei enrichment and extended irradiation to allow for longer fuel cycles.
9408110147 940809 PDR ADOCK 05000395 P
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action i
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revisions to the TS. The proposed revisions would permit use of fuel enriched to a nominal j
5.0 w/o U-235. The safety considerations associated with reactor operation i
with tigher enrichment and extended irradiation have been evaluated by the staff. The staff has concluded that such changes would not adversely affect
[
plant safety. The proposed changes have no adverse affect on the probability of any accident.
The higher enrichment with fuel burnup to 48000 MWD /MTU may slightly change the mix of fission products that might be released in the event of a serious accident but such small changes would not significantly affect the consequences of serious accidents. No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any radiological effluent that may be released off site. There is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
i l
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts of reactor operation with higher enrichment and extended irradiation, the proposed changes to the TS involve systems located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR
]
Part 20.
They do not affect non-radiological plant effluent and have no other environmental impact.
The potential environmental impacts of transportation of more highly
)
enriched and more highly irradiated fuel were published and discussed in the i
staff assessment entitled "NRC Assessment of the Environmental Effects of i
Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel Enrichment and Irradiation," dated July 7,1988, and published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on August 11, 1988 (53 FR 30355) in connection with the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. As indicated therein, the environmental cost contribution of the proposed increase in the
i fuel enrichment and irradiation limits is either unchanged or less than that given in Table S-4 of 10 CFR SI.52(c). These findings are applicable to this amendment for Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1.
The Commission has concluded, therefore, that there are no significant radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
Alternative to the Proposed Action Since the Commission has concluded that there are no significant environmental effects from the proposed action, any other alternative would have equal or greater environmental impacts and need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment.
This would not reduce the environmental impact of plant operation and would result in reduced operational flexibility.
Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to operation of the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment. Based on the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details on this action, see the application for amendment dated December 13, 1993, as supplemented February 2, 1994, and March 11, 1994, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document
e, Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. and at the Fairfield County Library, Garden & Washington Streets, Winnsboro, S.C., 29180.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of August, 1994.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f weam-4 David B. Matthews, Director Project Directorate 11-1 Division of Reactor Projects - I\\II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
)
h i