ML20126H692

Environ Assessment & Finding of No Significant Impact Re Issuance of One Time Exemption from 10CFR50,app J

ML20126H692
Person / Time
Site:	Millstone
Issue date:	12/30/1992
From:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20126H677	List: ML20126H674 ML20126H692
References
NUDOCS 9301050286
Download: ML20126H692 (4)

Text

'

I N 1 ',

-7590-01^

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-NORlHEAST'NUCLEAC ENERGY COMPANY MILLSTONE NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT 1 DOCKET NO. 50-245 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT J The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of a one-time exemption from 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Par _agraph.

.III.A.6(b) to the Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECO or1the~ licensee) for Millstone Nuclear . Power Station, Unit 1, located in New London County,-

Connecticut, i'

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Procosed Action:

The proposed action would grant,a one-time ~exemptian to provide relief' ~

.from the accelerated Type A containment' integrated l e k rate test frequency

-required.by Appendix J to_10'CFR Part 50 when two consecutive Type A tests have failed to meet their acceptance. criteria. 1 The Nied for the' Proposed Action:

One -of the' conditions of all operating

licenses for water-cooled power : "

reactors, as'specified in 10 CFR 50.54(o), istthat primary reactor--

l containments:shallLmeet the containment leakage ~ test requirementsisetiforth in

.-10 CFR Part-50,' Appendix J.

7 Appendix..Jto10CFRPart50,-ParagraphIII.A[6(b), requires,inpart, that if two consecutive periodic l Type A testsLfail to meet the: applicable [

acceptance criteria in III= A.5(b), a Type: A test shall be~ performed at each; .

9301050286 921230- 25 PDR .ADOCK O e .

Y 2

plant shutdown for refueling or approximately 18 months, whichever occurs first, until two consecutive Type A tests meet the acceptance criteria in III.A.5(b), after which time the normal retest schedule specified in III.D (three tests in 10 years) may be resumed.

NRC Information Notice (IN) No. 85-71 states that licensees may submit a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) with an alternate leakage test program proposal as an exemption request for NRC staff review if it is determined that Type B and C leakage rates constitute the identified contributor to the failure of the two Type A tests, If the CAP and alternate leakage rate test program is approved, the licensee is allowed to implement the corrective action and alternate leakage rate test program in lieu of the required increase in Type A test frequency.

Millstone Unit I experienced failures of the "As-Found" Type A tests in 1987 and 1991, therefore, a test is required to be performed during the present operatir. ;;ycle in late December 1992 or January 1993. In order to perform this required Type A test, Millstone Unit I would have to undergo a forced shutdown. Such a shutdown would result in an increase in occupational radiation exposure and an additional transient on the plant.

Because the licensee determined that Type C local leakage rates were the reason for the "As-Found" Type A test failures, NNECO submitted a CAP with an alternate leakage test program proposal in lieu of the required accelerated testing and a request for exemption from 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Paragraph III.A.6(b).

Environmental Imoacts of the Propored Action:

The proposed action would provide a one-time exemption from the accelerated Type A containment integrated leak rate test frequency required by

Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 when two consecutive Type A tests have failed to meet their acceptance criteria. The NRC staff has reviewed the proposed exemption and concluded that the licensee's CAP and alternate leakage rate test program are acceptable. The NRC staff finds that the CAP and alternate leakage rate test program are an acceptable alternative to the increased Type A test frequency (every 18 months) and that there is reasonable assurance that the containment leakage-limiting function will be maintained. Therefore, the subject exemption is acceptable and the licensee will return to the normal test schedule of three tests in 10 years. With the normal test schedule, Type A tests would be scheduled to be performed at the next two plant shutdowns for refueling (currently expected to be in 1994 and 1996).

Thus, radiological releases will not differ from those determined previously and the proposed exemption does not otherwise affect facility radiological effluent or occupational exposures. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemption does not affect plant nonradiological effluents and have no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes there are no measurable radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated.with the proposed exemption.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action:

Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemptions, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. The principal alternative to the exemptions would be to deny the exemptions requested. Such action would not enhance the protection of the environment.

o Alternative Use of Resources:

This action does not involve the use of resources not considered previously in the Final Environmental Statement for Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1.

Aaencies and Persons Consulted:

The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.

FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on 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 exemptions.

For further details with respect to this proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated November 4,1992, 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 Rockville, Maryland this 30th day of December 1992.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, -~ <

/

x 'g f80 i F. Stolz, Direct r

/ Pr ject Directorate 4

@ision of Reactor rojects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation