ML20126F558
| ML20126F558 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 12/10/1992 |
| From: | Hannon J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126F561 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9212300390 | |
| Download: ML20126F558 (4) | |
Text
3 dl 7590-01:
UNITED STATES ~ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNION ElECTRfC-COMPANY CALLAWAY PLANT. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO.50-483 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from the requirements of Section.III.O.1.(a) of-Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 issued to the Union Electric Company,.(the licensee), for the Callaway Plant, Unit 1, located in Callaway County, Missouri.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of proposed Action The proposed action would grant an exemption from Section Ill D.I.'(a) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, which requires a set of three: Type.A tests _-
(Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test or'CILRT) be performed,-at approximately equal intervals during each 10-year service peri.od. This licensee request is for a one-time exemption from the requirement that the third Type A test of the first 10-year service period be-performed during the service period. The exemption would extend the. current service period by approximately 3 months beyond the normal 10-year service period. The licensee request stated the exemption would extend the current service period by 14 g
months.
This statement was based on the assumption that the 10-year service i
l-period began with preoperational CILRT performed-in January-1984, instead of i
'9212300390'9212105
.PDR ADOCK 05000483 P~
PD3
.~
s.-
s,.
the inservice date of December 1984 - The 10-year service period began in December 1984.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's request for j
exemption dated June 16, 1992.
The Need for the proposed Action The proposed exemption.is.needed because the licensee's curren't refueling outage schedule requires the third CILRT for the first 10-year service period be performed at either a 35-month or 53-month interval.
(CILRTs are generally performed coincident with refueling outages due to the time required for their performance.) The first and second CILRT testing intervals for the firt.t 10-year service period were 40 and-41 months. Without this exemption, the licensee would be required to perform the third CILRT at a-35-month interval and perform an additional (fourth) CILRT during the second 10-year service period.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The Commission's staff has. determined that granting the proposed exemption.would not significantly increase =the probability or amount of expected primary containment leakage and that containment integrity would thus be maintained. The current requirement in Section III.D.I'.(a) that three. Type A tests be performed would continue to be met, except one. interval- (54-months) will be longer than specified in the Callaway Technical Specifications.
Consequently, the probability of accidents would'no.t be. increased, nor would the post-accident radiological releases be greater than previously determined.
Neither would the proposed exemption'otherwise affect radiological plant efflents.
Therefore, the Commission's staff concludes that there.are no.-
-~, --
significant radiological environmental impacts _ associated with-the_
proposed exemption.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemption-involves a change to surveillance andng requirements.
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental; impact.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternative to the Proposed Action Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant environmental impacts _ associated with the proposed action, any alternatives would have either no or greater environmental impact.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption.
This would not reduce the environmental impacts attributed to the facility but would result in added operating cost by requiring a fourth Type A test during the second '0-year service period, Alternative Use of Resources This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the " Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of Callaway Plant, Unit No, 1," dated January 1982, Agencies and Persons Consulted The-NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING 0F N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT-The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
i
/-
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude 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 amendment dated June 16, 1992, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington D.C. and at the Callaway County Public Library, 710 Court Street, fulton, Missouri 65251.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of December 1992.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,)
S w:
John N. Hannon, Director Project Directorate 111-3 Division of Reactor Projects Ill/IV/V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
_-_____ ______