ML20137V639
| ML20137V639 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 04/16/1997 |
| From: | Beckner W NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137V645 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9704170364 | |
| Download: ML20137V639 (4) | |
Text
_
i i.
[-
i UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION ENTERGY OPERATIONS. INC.
1 DOCKET NO. 50-368 i
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE. UNIT 2 ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT AND. FINDING OF l
NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l
1 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering i
]
issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its regulations to l
Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), in connection with operation of i
Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2, located in Pope County, Arkansas, under Facility
}-
Operating License No. NPF-6.
ENVIft0NMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirement to have an oil collection system for the RCP lube oil addition system, thus allowing the licensee to utilize compensatory actions and procedures to add lube oil to reactor coolant pumps (RCPs) in limited quantities at power. The requirement is contained in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.0, which provides that the licensee shall have a collection system " capable of collecting lube oil from all pressurized and unpressurized leakage sites in the reactor coolant pump lube oil systems."
It also specifies that " leakage points to be protected shall include lift pump and piping, overflow lines,
' lube oil cooler, oil fill and drain lines and plugs, flanged connections on 9704170364 970416 yDR ADOCK 05000368 PDR 4--
e., ~<
. 4 i
oil lines, and lube oil reservoirs where such features exist on the reactor j
coolant pumps."
l The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for e
j an exemption dated December 23, 1997.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
l The proposed action is needed to reduce dose and personnel hazards to workers who periodically add oil to the RCP lube oil system during power i
operation.
Environmental Imoacts of the Proposed Action:
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and has concluded that despite not having a lube oil collection system for the l
reactor coolant pump lube oil fill lines, the design of the oil filling system and the level of protection provided by compensatory measures during oil fill operations provide reasonable assurance that a lube oil fire will not occur.
The staff also has concluded that in the event of a worst-case postulated fire, it would be of limited magnitude and extent.
In addition, such a fire j
would not cause significant damage in the containment building and would not prevent the operators from achieving and maintaining safe shutdown conditions.
The proposed action 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. Accordingly, the i
Comunission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental i
impacts associated with the proposed action.
0 3
4
_3_
j With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action involves 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. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the l
proposed action, i
l Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
j Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable environmental t
j impact associated with the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated. As an alternative to the i
1 j
proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action. Denial
)
of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts.
The environmental impacts of the proposed action 'and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for ANO-2.
Aaencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on March 14, 1997, the staff consulted with the Arkansas State official, Mr. David Snellings, Director of Radiation Control and Emergency Management, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the O
m_
. human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's letter dated April 11, 1996, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW.,
Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at t.he Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, AR 72801.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of April 1997.
F0'R THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W
Db William D. Beckner, Project Director Project Directorate VI-I Division of Reactor Projects III/IV Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i