ML20087K927
| ML20087K927 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 08/21/1995 |
| From: | Berkow H NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20087K928 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9508240248 | |
| Download: ML20087K927 (4) | |
Text
.
i i
g-7590 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0f911SSION GEORGIA POWER COMPANY. ET AL.
~
DOCKET NO. 50-424 V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING' PLANT. UNIT 1 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-68, issued to Georgia Power Company, et al.
(the license,e) for. operation of the Vogtle' Electric Generating Plant (Vogtle),
Unit 1, located at the licensee's site in Burke County, Georgia.
j ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT q
Identification of Procosed Action:
This Environmental Assessment ha's been prepared to address potential j
environmental issues related to' the licensee's application dated May 12, 1995,-_
as supplemented by letter dated July 6,1995..The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,. Appendix J, Paragraph III.D.I.(a), to the extent that a one-time extension of approximately 18 months would permit rescheduling the third containment integrated leak rate test (ILRT) from the March 1996 refueling outage to the September 1997 refueling outage. The requirement of 10 CFR Part 50,' Appendix j
J,Section IV.A, to perform a Type A test following any major modification to j
. the primary containment boundary will be maintained. No such modifications '
have been made to the containment since the last Type.A test in 1993, nor are any planned during the March 1996 refueling outage.
9508240248 950821" PDR ADOCK 05000424 P
PDR.
3
b 4
c.;
t.V ]
The Maed for the Proonsed Action:
The proposed action is needed to permit the licensee to de'for the Type A-1 ILRT from the spring 1996 refueling outage'to the September 1997 refueling-outage, thereby'saving the cost of performing'the test'and eliminating the-
' test from the 1996 outage.
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and.
concludes that the proposed one-time exemption would not increase the probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and would not affect facility radiation levels or facility radiological effluents.
In 4
accordance with Section III.D.1,(b) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, the i
J licensee will continue to be required to conduct the Type.B and C local-leak' l
rate tests, which historically have been shown to be the. principal means of I
detecting containment leakage paths with the Type A tests confirming the Type 1
B and C test results.
In' addition, even though the licensee would be exempt from the requirement to perform the Type A integrated leak rate test, they l
have committed to performing a general containment inspection as specified in-
.j 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Section V.A if the requested' exemption is granted.
The NRC staff considers that these inspections, though limited in scope, provide an important added level of confidence in the continued integrity of i
the containment boundary. The change will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any j
effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no'significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
l Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant l
. radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed actio1,
bb
.. - )
q
~
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action -
involves features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 2
It does not affect'nonradiological plant effluents and has no j
other environmental impact. Accordingly, the Cosmiission concludes that
]
there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with s
the proposed action.
l Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
'l 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 did not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on July 5, 1995, the staff consulted with the Georgia State official, Mr. James Hardeman of the Environmental Protection Division, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 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.
k 1
0
- 4 For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's letters dated May 12, 1995, and July 6,1995, 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 Burke County Library, 412 Fourth Street, Waynesboro, Georgia.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of August 1995.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION H bert N. Berkow, Director Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation d
J
.