ML20126F406
| ML20126F406 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 12/16/1992 |
| From: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126F409 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9212300296 | |
| Download: ML20126F406 (3) | |
Text
r; a
l:'y'-
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY COMPANY MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION.' UNIT NO.- 2 DOCKET NO. 50-331 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering-issuance of a license amendment to Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, (the l
licensee) for the Hillstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2, located at the licensee's site in New London County, Connecticut.
-ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed amendment would modify the Millstone 2 Technical Specifications (TS) in the area of TABLE 3.3-3, ENGINEEREb SAFETY FEATURE ACTUATION SYSTEM INSTRUMENT _ATION (Page 3/4.3-13), the TABLE NOTATION, page 3/4.3-16 and the ACTION STATEMENTS, ACTION 4, page.3/4.3-17. The' license
-amendment is relative to proposed Sump Recirculation Actuation Signal (SRAS) and Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESAS) logic design modifications. The current two out of four SRAS logic would be modified to be a selective logic that only considers four of the original six combinations.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The change-is needed to prevent the generation of.a premature SRAS, as a-
~
result of a design basis single active-failure, such as the loss _ of DC Bus 9212300296 921216 PDR ADOCK 05000336
. p PDR j
^
w T
l J
. 201A or B,- (without considerating non-safety related backup sources). Also, I
the proposed change to the ESAS would eliminate the two combinations of Refueling Water Storage Tank (RWST) level sensing which would initiate an SRAS should a failure of either vital DC bus occur.
Environmental Imoacts of the Procosed 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 28, 1992, supplemented by letter dated November 25, 1992, which has been evaluated by the staff using NRC-approved methodology.
The proposed amendment will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in.the types of:any-effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.- -In addition, the proposed amendment described is a refinsment, rather than a substantial change in the operation of the facility. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed 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 affect 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 Prooosed 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 beyond the scope of resources used during normal plant operation, which were assessed in the Final Environmental Statement relating to plant operation.
Acencies and Persons Consulted:
The Commission's staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or perscns.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed amendment.
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.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request for license amendment dated October 28, 1992, supplemented by letter dated November 25, 1992, as supplemented December 8,1992, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 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 16thday of December 1992 FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 9
ti./
Jo n F. Stolz, DirecY r oject Directorate 1-4 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 4
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.