ML20205F652
| ML20205F652 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1987 |
| From: | Knighton G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17303A387 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8703310237 | |
| Download: ML20205F652 (5) | |
Text
.-
r UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCKET N0. STN 50-530 PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT 3 ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, ET AL.
NOTICE OF ISSUANCE OF FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Notice is hereby given that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con.ission (the Commission), has issued Facility Operating License No. NPF-65, (License) to Arizona Public Service Company, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, El Paso Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, Public Service Company of New Mexico, Los-Angeles Department of k'ater and Power, and Southern California Public Power Authority. This License authorizes operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3 (facility) at reactor core power levels not in excess of 3800 megawatts-thermal in accordance with the provisions of the License, the Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan. However, the License contains one condition which currently limits operation to five percent of full power (190 megawatts thermal). Authorization to operate at greater than five percent will require specific Connission approval.
Ir. addition, operation above Mode 5 is restricted until successful testing and operability of Emergency Diesel Generators in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterien 17, is achieved.
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, l' nit 3 is a pressurized water reactor which utilizes a CESSAR standard plant design and is located at the licensees' site in Maricopa County, Arizona approximately 36 miles west of the city of Phoenix.
237 "
q1@
-p_
1 The' application for the license, as amended, complies with the stardards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's regulations. The Comission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Comission's regulattens in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the License. Prior public notice of the overall-action involving the proposed issuance of an operating license was published in the FEDERAL REGISTEP on July 11, 1980 (45 F.P. 46941) as clarified ir. a notice published July 25, 1980 (45 F.R. 49732).
The Comission has determined that the issuance of this License will net result in any environmental impacts other than those evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement since the activity authorized by the License is encompassed by the overall action evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) Facility Operating License No. NPF-65, with Technical Specifications (NUREG-1248) and Environmental Protection Plan; (2) the report of the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards dated December 15,1981;(3) the Comission's Safety Evaluation Report on Palo Verde dated November 1981; Sr.,plement Nos. I through 11, dated February 1982, May 1982, September 1982, March 1983, November 1983, October 1984, December 1984, May 1985, December.1985, April 1986 and March 1987, respectively; (4) the Comission's related Safety Evaluation Report on CESSAP. dated November 1981; Supplement No. I dated March 1983; Supplement No. 2 dated September 1983;
+..
3 (5) the' Final Safety Analysis Report and amendrents thereto; (6) the Environmental Report and supplements thereto; (7) the_ Draft Environmental Statement dated October 1981, (8) the Final Environmental Statement dated Parch 1982; and (9) the. Initial Decision and Order Dismissing Proceeding issued by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, dated December 30, 1982, and July 22, 1985, respectively and the Decision issued by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board, dated February 15, 1983.
These documents are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C., and the Phoenix Public Library, Business, Science and Technology Department, 12 East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85004. A copy of Facility Operating License No. NPF-65 may be obtained upon request addressed to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C.
20555, Attention: Director, Division of PWR Licensing-B.
Copies of the Safety Evaluation Report and its Supplements I through 11 (NUREG-0857), the Final Environmental Statement (NUREG-0841) and the Techrical Specifications (NUREG-1248) may be purchased by calling (202) 275-2060 or (202) 275-2171 or by writing to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Post Office Box 37082, Washington, D.C.
20013-7082.
NUREG-0857 may also be purchased from the National Technical Information Service, Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, the 2514 day of March, 1987.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGU ATORY COMMISSION l
i
' l'/ G 4 $ K
' George F. Knightop Director PWR Project Directorate No. 7 Division of PWR Licensing-B
.o-March 1987 I
ASSESSMENT OF THE EFFECT OF LICENSE DURATION ON THE MATTERS DISCUSSED IN THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT FOR THE PALO VERDE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1, 2 AND 3
~
INTRODUCTION The Final Environmental Statement (FES) for the operation of' the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2 and 3 (PVNGS 1-3) was published in February 1982. At that time it was staff practice to issue operating licenses for a period of 40 years from the date of issuance of the construction permit.
This was approximately 30 years of operating life.
~
However, since the applicants have requested in their application that the operating licenses (OL) for PVNGS 1-3 then under ennsideration by the staff, have a duration of 40 years from the date of OL issuance, an assessment contained herein is made for those issues affected by the 40-year duration.
DISCUSSION The staff reviewed the PVNGS 1-3 FES to detennine which aspects condidered in the FES are affected by the duration of the operating license.
In general, the FES assesses various impacts associated with operation of the facility in terms of annual impacts and balances these against the anticipated annual energy production benefits. Thus, the overall assessment and conclusions would not be dependent on specific operating life. There are, however, two areas in which a specific operating life was assumed. These are as follows:
1.
Radiological assessment are based on a 15-year plant midlife.
2.
Uranium fuel cycle impacts are based on 30 years of operation.
EVALUATION The staff's appraisal of the significance of the use of 40 years of operations rather than 30 as it affects the two areas above is presented in the following discussions:
1.
Radiological Assessment - The NRC staff calculated dose comitments to the human population residing around nuclear power reactors to assess the impact on people from radioactive material released from these reactors. The annual. dose commitment is calculated to be the dose that would be eceived over a 50-year period following the intake of radio-activity for one year under the conditions that would exist 15 years after the plant began operation.
The 15-year period is chosen as representing the midpoint of plant operation and is incorporated into the dose models by allowing for buildup of long life radionuclides in the soil.
It affects the estimated doses only for radionuclides ingested by humans that have half-lives greater than a few years.
For a plant licensed for 40 years, increasing the buildup period I
- ~ ~ -.. - - - ~
.i-3-
x r from 15 to 20 years would increase the dose from long life radionuclides via the ingestion pathways by 10% at most.
It would have much less effect on dose from shorter life radionuclides. Table C-4 of the PVNGS 1-3 FES indicates that the estimated doses via the ingestion pathways are well below the regulatory design objectives. For example, the ingestion dose to the thyroid from PVNGS Unit 1 is 1.8 mrem /yr compared to an Appendix I design objective of 15 mrem /yr. Thus, an increase of even as much as 10% in these pathways would remain well below the Appendix I guidelines and would not be significant.
2.
Uranium Fuel Cycle Impacts - The impacts of the uranium fuel cycle are based on 30 years of operation of a model LWR. The fuel reouirements for the model LWR are assumed to be one initial core load and 29 annual refuel-ings (approximately 1/3 core). The annual fuel requi.rement for the model LWR averaged out over a 40-year operating life (1 initial core and 39 refuelings of approximately 1.3 core) would be reduced slightly as. compared to the annual fuel requirement averaged for a 30-year operating life.
The net result would be approximately 1.5% reduction in the annual fuel requirement for the model LWR. This small reduction in fuel requirements would not lead to significant changes in the impacts of the uranium fuel cycle. The staff judges that there would not be any changes to PVNGS 1-3 FES Table 5.16 (S-3) that would be necessary in order to consider 40 years of operation.
If anything, the value,in Table 5.16 become more conservative when a 40-year period of operation is considered.
CONCLUSIONS The staff has reviewed the PVNGS 1-3 FES and determined that only two of the areas related to its NEPA analysis discussed in the statement were tied directly to a 30-year operating period. Based on the reasons discussed in the sections above, the staff has concluded that the impacts associated with a 40-year license duration are not significantly different from those associated with a 30-year license duration and are not significantly different from those assessed I
in the PVNGS 1-3 FES.
l 1
i I
l
e 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0ttilSSION ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, ET. AL.
DOCKET NO.:
STN S0-529 AND STN 50-530 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of a partial exemption from the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to the Arizona Public Service Company, Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, El Paso Electric Company, Southern California Edison Company, Public Service Company of Mexico. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Southern California Public Power Authority (the applicants) for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3 located at the applicant's site in Maricopa County, Arizona, l
l ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT:
l l
Identification of Proposed Action: The exemption from Appendix J of 10 CFR t
l Part 50 would eliminate the full pressure test required by paragraph III.D.2(b) l (ii) and substitute a seal leakage test to be conducted at a pressure specified in the Technical Specifications. The proposed exemption is in accordance with the applicants' letter dated October 7,1985.
g #,
M?-
p c
.t 7590-01 The Need for the Proposed Action: The proposed Appendix J exemption is required to provide the applicant with greater plant availability over the lifetime of the plant. Without the proposed exemption, the applicant would be required to perform a full pressure test of air locks each time the plant enters the
. cold shutdown mode, thereby extending each outage.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: With respect to the proposed exemption from Appendix J, the increment of environmental impact is related solely to the potential increased probability of containment leakage during an accident. This would lead to higher offsite and control room doses.
However, this potential increase is very small, due to the added seal leakage tests and the protection against excessive leakage afforded by the other tests required by Appendix J.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: Because the staff has concluded that there -
is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternative to this exemption will have either no environmental impact or greater environmental impact.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption. This would not reduce environmental impacts of plant operations and would result in reduced operational flexibility and unwarranted delays in power ascension.
' Alternative Use of Resources: This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the "FES Related to the Operation of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2 and 3, " dated February 1982.
?.
,(
7590-01 #
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The NRC staff reviewed the applicant's request
, that supports the proposed exemption. The NRC staff did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT
+
The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact state-
- ment for the proposed exemption.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the i
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 letter dated October 7,1985, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N. W., Washington, D. C., and at the Phoenix Public Library, Business, Science and Technology Department, 12 East McDowell Road, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 22 day of November, 1985.
FOR THE NULEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Thomas M. Novak, Assistant Director for Licensing Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation t
,a,-
v--+-,-,.----,-w-----,,--,-e-.
.-,-n+n-.--,,,---,-,-~r--,_-,-meevnw-~rm.,,,,,-
-,,,-,,m-vewnm
,m.m m, e,,.n--w w.y, w mm-