ML20082K551
| ML20082K551 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 04/06/1995 |
| From: | Oconnor P NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082K554 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9504190345 | |
| Download: ML20082K551 (4) | |
Text
..
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-416 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF
~
NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its regulations to Facility Operating License No. NPF-29, issued to Entergy Operations, Inc.
(the licensee), for operation of the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (GGNS), located in Claiborne County, Mississippi.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated August 13, 1993, as supplemented by letters dated April 15, May 11, June 24, and July 20, 1994, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), which would exempt Entergy Operations Inc. from Sections III.D.l(a), III.D.2, III.D.2(b)(i),
III.D.2.(b)(iii) and III.D.3 of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, to permit the selection of containment leakage rate testing intervals for components on the basis of performance.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action is needed to permit the licensee to defer a portion of the Type B and C tests from the April 1995 and September 1996 refueling outages to the April 1998 refueling outage, thereby reducing the occupational radiation exposure received by the plant staff, saving the cost of performing the test and eliminating the test period from the critical path time of the outage.
9504190345 950406 PDR ADOCK 05000416 P
j t i
l Nithout this exemption, the licensee would incur additional personnel I
radiation exposure during system reconfigurations, and instrumentation i
j setup and restoration.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
j The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action j
and concludes that the proposed exemption would not increase the i
i probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and the proposed exemption would not affect facility radiation levels or facility i
]
radiological effluents. The licensee, as a condition of the proposed j
exemption, will perform the visual containment inspection although it is
{
only required by Appendix J to be conducted in conjunction with Type A 4
tests. The NRC staff considers that these inspections, though limited in i
I j
scope, provide an important added level of confidence in the continued j
integrity of the containment boundary.
l The change will not increase the probability or consequences of j
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may i
be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable j
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the 1
l Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action involves features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in l
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
4 I
=.. -. -
l Alternative to the Proposed Action:
{
l Since the Comission has concluded there is no measurable f
l environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. As an l
alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application would result in no change in j
current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed '
s action and the alternative action are similar.
j Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously 4
a j
considered in the Final Environmental Statements related to operation of i-3 Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
2
[!
Acencies and Persons Consulted:
i j
In accordance with its stated policy, on March 30, 1995 the staff 4
consulted with the Mississippi State official, Mr. Eddie Fuente of the l
l Mississippi State Department of Health, regarding the environmental impact l
of the proposed action. The State official had no coments.
j FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT i
j Based upon the environmental assessment, the Comission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of J
the human environment. Accordingly, the Comission has determined not to j
prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request for j
exemption dated August 13, 1993, as supplemented by letters dated April 15,
~
j May 11, June 24, and July 20,19M, which are available for public i
i i
i
o
] i i
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building,
{
2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the Judge George W. Armstrong Library, 220 S. Commerce Street, Natchez, Missigsippi 39120.
d Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 6th day of April 1995.
]
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
Paul W. O'Connor, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate IV-1 Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation I
i l
i 4
f 4
- ~
,