ML20128C133

EA & Finding of No Significant Impact Re Proposed Rev to TS to Permit Use of Reactor Fuel Enriched to Nominal 5.0 Weight Percent U-235 for New Reload Fuel Assemblies & Rods

ML20128C133
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	11/24/1992
From:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20128C122	List: ML20128C119 ML20128C133
References
NUDOCS 9212040236
Download: ML20128C133 (4)

Text

.. .

W 7590-01 VNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATOPf COMMISSION CPU NUCLEAR CORPORATigi METROPOLITAN EDIS0N COMPANY dERSEY CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY DOCKET NO. 50-289 ENVIRONFENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT

.i The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering issuance of an amendment to facility Operating License No. DPR-50 issued to GPU Nuclear Corporation, et al. (the licensee), for operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Uni'.1 (TM1-1), located in Dauphin Count ,

Pennsylvania.

ENVIRONMENTAL /.511SHERI Identification of the Procosed Action:

The proposed amendment would revise t.he Technical Specifications relating to fuel enrichment.

The proposed amendment is in accordance with GPU Nuclear Corporation's application dated August 25, 1992.

Need for the Proposed Action:

The proposed changes to the Facility Operating License are needed so that the licensee can use more highly enriched fuel, and thereby provide the flexibility of extending the fuel irradiation /burnup to permit longer fuel cycles (i.e., longer continuous periods of operation). Use of the proposed-more highly enriched fuels would require the use of fewer fuel assemblies over the remaining life of the plant.

9212040236 921124 PDR ADOCK 05000289

P PDR

I Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action:

The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed revisions to the Technical Specifications. The proposed revision would permit use of fuel enriched with Uranium-235 (U-235) up to 5.0 nominal weight percent (w/o) and would allow fuel burnup to a maximum of 60 gigawatt-days per metric ton of uranium (GWD/MTU). The safety considerations associated with reactor operation using higher fuel enrichment and burnup rates have been evaluated by the NRC staff (the staff). Based on its review, the staff concludes that the proposed changes are acceptable and would not adversely affect plant safety.

The proposed changes have no adverse affect on the probability of any accident. The increased burnup may slightly change the mix of fission products that might be released in the event of a serious accident but such small changes would not significantly affect the consequences of serious accidents. No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any radiological effluents that may be released offsite during normal plant operations. There is also no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the proposed action would result in no significant radiological environmental impact.

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed changes to the Technical Specifications involve components in the plant which are located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect nonradiological plant effluents and have no other envirnnmental impacts. Therefore, the staff concludes that there are no significant nonradiological impacts associated with the proposed amendment.

The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use of more highly enriched fuel and extended burnup rates have been discussed in the

l I

generic staff assessment entitled "NRC Assessment of the Environmental Effects of Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel Enrichment and Irradiation,"

dated July 7, 1988, and published in the Federal Reoister (53 FR 30355). As indicated therein, the environmental cost contribution of the proposed increase in fuel enrichment and irradiation limits are either unchanged or may in fact be reduced from those sunnarized in Table S-4 asset forth in 10 CFR Sl.52(c).

Therefore, the staff concludes that there are no significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action:

l Since the staff concludes that there are no significant environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any alternatives with l equal or greater environmental impacts need not be evaluated, The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment.

This would not reduce environmental impacts of plant operation and would result in reduced operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources:

l The action would involve no use of resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station dated December 1972.

Acencies and Persons Consulted:

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

I

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACI The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the pro;osed amendment. Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Comission 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 application for amendment dated Audust 25, 1992, which is available for public inspection in the Comission's Public Doc. ment Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the local public dccument room located at the Government Publications Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Walnut Street and comonwealth Avenue, Box 1601, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania 17105.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 24th day of November 1992.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4

hhiFF. Stolz, Direct r Pro lect Directorate -4 1sion of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i

l

.. .. . .