ML20206E054
| ML20206E054 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1988 |
| From: | Berkow H Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206E059 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8811170380 | |
| Download: ML20206E054 (4) | |
Text
.
-y 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AHO F0WER COMPANY DOCKET IO. 50-281 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering the issuance of an exemption from the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee) for the Surry Power Station, Unit No. 2, located in Surry County, Virginia.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action:
The proposed exemption would grant a one-time relief from the schedular requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, paragraph III.A.6(b) to perform a Type A test every outage until two consecutive tests meet the acceptance criteria. Tha requested exemption would allow the licensee to resume their normal retest schedule in accordance with paragraph 111.0. of Appendix J.
The licensee's request for exemption and bases therefore are contained in a letter dated August 12, 1988, as supplemented on August 15 and 31, 1988.
The licensee had previously submitted information on this subject by letter dated February 29, 1988.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed exemption would allow a one-time relief from performing a Type A test for the current refueling outage and enable Surry Unit 2 to resume the normal retest schedule specified in Section 111.0. of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, and therefore prevent unnecessary pressurization of the containment to design pressure basis.
9811170380 881110 PDR ADOCK 05000281 P
. The purpose of the Type A testing is to measure and ensure that the leakage through the primary reactor containment does not exceed the maximum allowable leakage rate.
It also provides assurance that periodic surveillane,e, 4
maintenance and repairs are made to systems or components penetrating the containment. The last three Type A tests that the licensee performed have demonstrated that containment integrity has not significantly degraded over the operating cycle.
In addition, the licensee has replaced containment sump isolation valves which were major contributors to containment leakage problems, and resolved the staff's concern about leakage from water-filled containment penetrations which are expected to operate during post-accident conditions.
Therefore, the licensee has requested a one-time exemption from the schedular requirements of paragraph 111.A.6(b) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The proposed exemption would allow a one-time relief from the schedular requirements to perform a Type A test every outage until two consecutive tests meet the acceptance criteria. The licensee's last three Type A tests have demonstrated that there has been no significant degradation of containment integrity over the operating cycle.
The proposed exemption will not negatively impact containment integrity and will not significantly change the risk from facility accidents. Therefore, post-accident radiological releases will not be significantly greater than previously determined, nor does the proposed exemption otherwise affect radiological plant effluents, or result in any significant occupational exposure.
Likewise, the proposed exemption would not affect nonradiological plant effluents and would have no other environmental impacts. Therefore, the Consnission concludes that there are no significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
~
. Alternatives to the Proposed Action:
Because it has been concluded that there are r.o measurable impacts associated with the proposed exemption, any alt.. native to the exemption will have either no environmental impacts or greater environmental impacts.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption.
Such action would not reduce environmental impacts of the Surry Unit 2 operations and would result in reduced operational flexibility.
Alternative Use Of Re:curces:
This action does net involve the use of resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Surry Power Station, Unit 2.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude 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 exemption from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, dated August 12, 1988, as supplemented on August 15 and 31, 1988, and previous iaiormation submitted by letter dated February 29, 1988, which are available far public inspection at the Commission's
~
1 i
Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Washington D.C., and at the Swem Library, College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1Cthday of November,1988.
FOR THE HUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Herbert N. Berkow, Director Project Directorate 11-2 f
Division of Reactor Projects-I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation l
I l
l l
l