ML20087K105
| ML20087K105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 08/17/1995 |
| From: | Larry Wheeler NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20087K107 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9508230010 | |
| Download: ML20087K105 (4) | |
Text
,_
y n.
e s:sa 8
Lg Je
- 7590-01 I f
s
' UNITED' STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COP 911SSION
. DOCKET NOS. 50-369 and 50-370 MCGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION.-UNIT N0S. 1 and'2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-9 and NPF-17,
-issued to' Duke Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the McGuire~
Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 1
Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would change the Technical Specifications. (TS) to -
(a) allow the maximum enrichment for fuel stored in the fuel pools to increase from a nominal ~ value of 4.0 to 5.0 weight percent' Uranium-235, (b) establish I
new loading patterns for new and irradiated fuel'in the spent fuel' pool.to accommodate this increase, (c)' add a TS to establish a limit for boron concentration for all modes of operation, (d)' add BASES to correspond to the:
TS that were added, (e) add TS to reflect limits for fuel storage criticality analysis, and (f) reformat the TS to bring them more in line with' the standard.
. format in the NRC report NUREG-1431, " Standard Technical-Specifications Westinghouse Plants."
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for
~
amendment; dated June'13, 1994, as supplemented by letters dated August 15, 1994, March 23 and April 18, 1995.
9508230010 950817 PDR ADOCK 05000369.s
-P-PDR
,,g.
,e
-sr s
--m-*-e9.rr'wv
w
gi; j!e * ~ t, The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action is needed so'that the licens'ee can use higher fuel enrichment to provide additional: flexibility in the licensee's reload design efforts and to increase'the efficiency of fuel storage cell use in the. spent fuel pools.
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revisions to.
l the TS. The proposed revisions would permit storage of fuel enriched to a nominal 5.0 weight percent Uranium-235. The safety considerations associated
-with storing new'and spent fuel of a higher enrichment ~have been evaluated by the NRC staff.
The staff has concluded that such changes would not.. adversely affect plant safety. The proposed changes have no adverse effect on the probability of any accident. No changes are being made in.the types or
.. amounts of any radiological effluents that may be-released offsite. There is no significant increase in the allowable individual'or cumulative occupational l
radiation exposure.
The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use of higher enrichment fuel and extended. irradiation-were published and discussed in:the staff assessment entitled, "NRC Assessment of the Environmental Effects of. Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel Enrichment and Irradiation,"
j dated July 7,1988, and published in the Federal Reaister (53 FR 30355) on-August II, 1988, as corrected on August 24, 1988 (53 FR 32322), in connection
~
with Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. As indicated therein, the environmental
+
l
- e 1
-~
t cost contribution of the proposed increase in the fuel enrichment.and irradiation limits are either unchanged or may, in fact, be reduced from those summarized in Table S-4 asset forth in 10 CFR 51.52(c). The results of the Shearon Harris assessment are applicable to McGuire, Units 1 and 2.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action involves features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in t
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.
81tf;caglives to the ProDosed 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 this action would be to deny the request for exemption. Such action would not reduce the environmental impacts of plant operations.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously 1
considered in the " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of
)
McGuire Nuclear Station Units I and 2," dated April 1976 and its addendum dated January 1981.
l l
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
l In accordance with its stated policy, on August 17, 1995, the NRC staff consulted with the North Carolina State official, Mr. Dayne H. Brown, Director l
~;
- s gr Department of Environmental, Health and Natural Resources, Division of Radiation Protection, regarding the environmental impact of the. proposed action. The State official had no comments.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the 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 letter dated June 13, 1994, as supplemented by letters dated August 15, 1994,.
March 23 and April 18, 1995, which are available for public 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 Atkins Library, University of North Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC), North Carolina.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of August 1995.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION c
Louis'L. Wheeler, Acting Director Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l