ML20126F204
| ML20126F204 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 12/17/1992 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126F207 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9212300146 | |
| Download: ML20126F204 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
l 7590-01 t
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
EORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT NO. 3 i
DOCKET NO. 50-423 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of a licente ame.idment to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, (the licensee) for the Hillstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 3, located at the licensee's site in New London County, Connecticut.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Pronosed Action:
The proposed amendment would revise the Technical Specifications (TS) to increase the surveillance test interval for the 4 kV bus undervoltage scheme so that associated logic and alarm relays are actuated once per 18 months rather than monthly.
The Need for the Procosed Action:
The license amendment is needed to remove an unnecessary testing requirement which could result in plant shutdown.
Environmental imoacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revision to the TS.
The impact of the above change has been evaluated in the licensee's.
proposal for amendment dated October 30, 1992, which has been evaluated by the staff using NRC-approved methodology.
The TS change will not increase the NON O
3
-,w
2 probability or consequences of accidents, fio changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no I
significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
In addition, the TS change described is a refinement, rather than a substantial change in the operation of the facility.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environ-mental impacts associated with this proposed TS amendment.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed amendment does involve features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
It does not affnct nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no-significant nonradiological impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
Alternatives to the proposed Action:
It has been concluded that there is no measurable impact associated with the proposed amendment; any alternatives to the amendment would have either.
essentially the same or greater environmental impact.
Alternative Use,of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources different from or l
beyond the scope of resources used during normal plant operation, which were 1
assessed in the Final Environmental Statement relating to plant operation.
l agencies and Persons Consultad:
The Commission's staff reviewed the licensee's request that supports the:
l proposed amendment.
The staff did not consult other agencies or persons, t
L.
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 amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request for license amendment dated October 30, 1992, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, i
2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the local public document room located at the Learning Resources Center, Thames Valley State Technical College, 574 New London Turnpike, Norwich, Connecticut 06360.
Dated at Rockvile, Maryland this 17thday of December 1992 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
. ~
,//
Jo)3'F.Stolz,Direc Project Directorate
-4 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
n e.