ML20206A030
| ML20206A030 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1986 |
| From: | Oconnor P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206A034 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8606170009 | |
| Download: ML20206A030 (3) | |
Text
-
- 4 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0pmISSION DUKE POWER COMPANY l
NORTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC MEM ERSHIP CORPORATION SALUDA RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC.
l DOCKET NO.
50-413 i
NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering l
issuance of an exemption from the schedular requirements of 10 CFR 50.71 (e)(3)(1) i l
to the Duke Power Company, North Carolina Electric Membership Corporation and Saluda River Electric Cooperative. Inc. (the licensee) for the Catawba Nuclear Station, Unit 1, located at the licensee's site in York County, South Carolina.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT j
Identification of Proposed Action: The proposed action would grant an exemption from the requirement of 10 CFR 50.71(e) to submit an updated Final i
Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) for Unit 1 of the Catawba Nuclear Station (CNS) within 24 months of the issuance of the operating license. An operating license was issued for Catawba Unit 1 on July 18, 1984.
By letter dated November 25, 1985, supplemented by letter dated May 21, 1986, Duke Power Company requested an exemption to 10 CFR 50.71(e) which would defer submittal of the UFSAR by 12
)
months on the basis that the Catawba FSAR applies to both Catawba Units.
It has been updated on January 31, 1986, prior to the issuance of the Catawba Unit 2 l
t
]
low power license on February 24, 1986.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The full power operating license for I
Catawba Unit 2 was issued on May 15, 1986. The licensee is now engaged in startup testing and expects to complete such testing within the next six months. Thus, I
l station personnel are unavailable for a detailed review of the FSAR.
It is 96o(.17 obog] g
I 7590-01
! i also desirable to complete power ascension testing and to place the plant in connercial operation before updating the FSAR so that design modifications found necessary by testing can b'e incorporated and so that licensee's en-gineering personnel who are heavily involved in the support of startup testing and resultant plant modifications can be used in preparing and reviewing the 4
updated FSAR. Thus, for Catawba Unit 1, there is a need to extend the date for submittal of the updated FSAR. The requested extension. to July 18, 1987, 4
i will allow the licensee's engineering personnel necessary and sufficient time j
to concentrate on startup testing and resultant design changes before concen-
]
trating on the engineering review associated with the preparation of the UFSAR.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action: The proposed exemption affects only the required date for updating the FSAR and does not affect the risk of facility accidents. Thus, post-accident radiological releases will not differ from those detennined previously, and the proposed exemption does not otherwise affect facility radiological effluents, or any significant occupational exposures.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed exemption does not affect plant non-radiological effluents and has no other environmental l
impact. Therefore, the Comission concludes there are no measureable i
radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Since the Comission has concluded there is no measureable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives either will have no environmental impact or will have a greater environmental impact. The principal alternative to the exemption would be to require an earlier date for submittal of the UFSAR. Such an action would not enhance the protection of the
a.
. 7590-01 environmentandwouldresuitinunnecessarydiversionofutilityengineering reso,urces from safety.related work.
Alternative Use of Resources: This action does not involve the use of l
resources not considered previously in the Final Environmental Statement for Catawba Nuclear Station.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's l
reouest and did not consult other agencies or persons.
.i Finding of No Significant Impact: The Commission has detennined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
Based upon the environmental assessment, the NRC staff 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 proposed action, see the licensee's letters dated November 25, 1985 and May 21, 1986. These letters are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C., and at the York County Library,138 East Black Street, Rock Hill South Carolina 29730.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, thisINday of b6 MN-FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Paul O'Connor, Acting Director PWR Project Directorate #4 Division of PWR Licensing-A DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR PRC System PWRf4 Rdg M0uncan KJabbour BJYoungblood Rdg R 4/
A PWFy PWR-A OELD PWR#4/DP KJabbour/mac MDinfan SouthoM (h BJYoungblood 06/f/86 06/J /86 06/
/86 06/$/86 I
i