ML20078E475
| ML20078E475 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/1994 |
| From: | Capra R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20078E477 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9411140079 | |
| Download: ML20078E475 (6) | |
Text
,
i j
.:o I,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY'COPMISSION COPMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-237 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF c
NC SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear kegulatory Commission (the Comission) is considering issuance of a schedular exemption from the requirement of 10 CFR Part 50, j
Appendix J, to Facility Operating License No. DPR-19, issued to Commonwealth.
Edison Company,-(Comed the licensee), for operation of the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2, located in Grundy County, Illinois.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1
Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would grant a schedular exemption from the i
requirements of Section III.A.6.(b) (Type A test) of Appendix J to 10 CFR i
Part 50 relating to the primary reactor containment leakage testing for water l
t
\\
cooled reactors. The purpose of the test is to assure that leakage through
{
the primary reactor containment shall not exceed allowable leakage rate values as specified in the Technical Specifications (TS) and that periodic surveillance is performed.
I loe proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's request for an exemption dated October 28, 1994.
Need for the Proposed Action The licensee requested, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), a one-time schedular exemption for Dresden, Unit 2, from the integrated leak rate test (ILRT) intervals for the Type A leak rate test required by 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Section III.A.6.(b). The exemption is requested to avoid the 9411140079 941107 PDR ADDCK 05000237 P
g !
potential for a reactor shutdown.
If a forced outage is imposed to perform testing, it would present undue hardship and cost in the form of increased I
radiological exposure.
Furthermore, if a forced outage is imposed to perform the required testing, an additional plant shutdown and startup will be required. Comed has had to reschedule the Dresden, Unit 2 refueling outage from September 1994 to July 1995, because of two forced maintenance outages.
Increasing the interval between refueling outages will cause Dresden, Unit 2, to exceed the Type A leak rate testing surveillance interval required for the Type A leak rate test which can not be performed during reactor operation.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The proposed action includes an exemption from performing the Type A test for a maximum period of 242 days beyond the required Appendix J test f
interval. As stated in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, the purpose of the primary containment leak rate testing requirements is to ensure that leakage rates are inaintained within the TS requirements and to assure that proper maintenance and repairs are performed throughout the service life of the containment boundary components. The requested exemption is consistent with the intent of 30 CFR 50.12(a), in that it represents a one-time only schedular extension of short duration.. The required leak tests will still be performed to assess compliance with TS requirements, albeit later, and to assure that any required maintenance or repair is performed. As noted in Section III.A.6.(b) of i
Appendix J, it was intended that the testing be performed during refueling outages or other convenient intervals.
Extending the Appendix J interval by a small amount to reach the next refueling outage will not significantly impact the integrity of the containment boundary and, therefore, will not t
significantly impact the consequences of an accident or transient in the unlikely event of occurrence during the 242 day extended period.
In order to provide an added margin of safety and to account for possible increases in the leakage rates of untested volumes during the relatively short period of the exemption, Dresden Unit 2 will impose an administrative limit for minimum i
pathway leakage of 85 percent of 0.75La for the remaining Unit 2 fuel cycle.
Past Unit 2 local leak rate test data have, in general, demonstrated good leak rate test results. The two consecutive Type A ILRT failures that have placed i
Unit 2 on the accelerated test schedule were the result of the addition of Type B and C test results to the Type A leakage and not problems with the Type A test boundaries. The containment leakage rate minus the Type B and C leakages for the last two Type A test failures during D2R12 and D2R13 were 285.50 standard cubic feet per hour (scfh) and 302.62 scfh, respectively.
These values are 47 percent and 50 percent of the Type A ILRT acceptance criteria of 610.56 scfh (.75La). The above data, along with the station imposed limit for minimum pathway leakage, provide a basis for showing that i
the probability of exceeding the off site dose rates established in 10 CFR l
Part 100, will not be increased by extending the current Type A testing interval for a maximum of 242 days. The proposed exemption does not affect plant nonradiological effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes there are no measurable environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives with equal or
greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. The principal alternative to the exemption would be to require rigid compliance with the requirements of Section III.A.6.(b) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50. Such action would not enhance the protection of the environment and would result in unjustified costs for the licensee.
Alternate Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not considered previously in the Final Environmental Statements for Dresden, Units 2 and 3, dated November 1973.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted The staff consulted with the Illinois State official regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's request for exemption dated October 28, 1994, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, l
l i
f.
's.
. y 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, D.C., and at the local public document room located at the Morris Public Library, 604 Liberty Street, Morris, Illinois 60451.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of November 1994.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3MOL O Robert A. Capra, Director Project Directorate III/2 Division of Reactor Projects - III/IV t
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation L
i l
/
f
' g >8 M %g we'4 D
UNITED STATES
{
o
~ f*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 e#
Novecher 7, 1994 DISTRIBUTION f
.,,,e Docket File i
DOcxET No.
50-P_37, 50-247 PDill-2 r/f I
Regulatory Publications Branch 009 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Division of Freedom of information and Publications Services CMoore Office of Administration and Resources Management OGC FROM:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation suaxcT:
C0 tim 0 WEALTH EDISON.C0i;PANY - Dresden, Units 2 and 3 l
J One signed original of the Federal Register Notice identified below is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal i
Register for publication. Additional conformed copies (
5 ) of the Notice are enclosed for your use.
)
Notice of Receipt of Application for Construction Permit (s) and Operating License (s).
Notice of Receipt of Partial Application for Construction Permit (s)and Facility
{
License (s): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.
Notice of Consideration of issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License.(Call with___ day insert date).
Notice of RWpt of Application for Facility License (s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report: and Notice o' Consideration of issuance of Facility License (s) and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing.
Notice ot Availability of NRC Draf t/ Final Environmental Statement.
Notice of Limited Work Authorization.
Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.
Notice of issuance of Construction Permit (s).
Notice of lasuance of Facility Operating License (s) or Amendment (s).
Order.
Exemption.
Notice of Granting Exemption.
Environmental Assessment.
Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.
Receipt of Petition for Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.
1ssuance of Final Director's Decision Under 10 CFR 2.206.
{
\\
Other:
)
Robert A. Capra, Director Project Directorate 111-2
Enclosure:
As stated j
1
Contact:
John F. Stang l
Pnone:
504-1345 Al'J,DI) 1 2 orn.ca >
tMyo,re\\
i 1
~ cunwauc>
g.c;.
l
, /.,. /9.4...
oarr>
J wac reau sie noieo> wacu aun-OFFICIAL RECORD COPY m~
,.. - -.. -.. -.