ML20207B845
| ML20207B845 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 07/16/1986 |
| From: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20204G171 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8607180268 | |
| Download: ML20207B845 (5) | |
Text
.
_..,.........-.. ~.. __ _
7590-01 4
'JNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0tNISSION DETROIT EDISON COMPANY WOLVERINE POWER SUPPLY COOPERATIVE, INCORPORATED DOCKET NO. 50-341 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Commission) is considering issu-ance of an exemption from the requirements of Section 50.44(c)(3)(i) of 10 CFR Part 50 to the Detroit Edison Company (DECO or licensee), holder of Facility Operating License No. NPF-43 which authorizes operation of the Femi-2 facility.
The facility is a boiling water reactor and is located in Monroe County, Michigan.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identificatinn of the Proposed Action: The exemption would allow inerting of the containment in response to the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50.44 to be postponed from six months after initial criticality until either the completion of the 100 percent thermal power trip tests or until 120 effective full power days of core burn-up is achieved, whichever is earlier. The exemption is in accordance with the licensee's request dated October 9, 1985, and supplemented on November 13, 1985.
The Need for the Propos.ed Action: The exemption is needed to permit comple-tionofthestartuptestprogramwithanoninertedcontainment. A non-inerted containment,during startup testing would facilitate containment entries on an as-needed frequency for identifying and correcting potential safety problems and,
would also provide greater safety to personnel entering the containment during this period.
(84Q7/8'Q2 XA
i
. )
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The increment of environmental impact is related to the potentially increased consequences of an accident sequence which would have been mitigated by an inerted containment. However, the regula-.
tory requbement from which an exemption is sought anticipated that the startup test program could be completed within six months and, consequently, the risk resulting from the core fission product inventory which would build up over the relatively short period of the power ascension test program while the containment was not inerted, was acceptable. While the regulation contemplated a six-month period to complete the startup test program, recent BWR startup test programs have proven to actua11" require an average of about eleven months. The Fermi-2 plant, due to its extended shutdown for the last nine months after completing almost all of the five percent power testing program, clearly was no't able to complete the startup test program prior to six months after initial criticality as reouired by 10 CFR 50.44. (Initial criticality was achieved on June 21,1985.)
With the simple stretch in time proposed in the sub.iect exemption, no significant increase in core inventory occurs and about the same effective core history is experienced as was contemplated in the applicable portion of the regulations.
This 151tation on the fission product inventory in the Fdmi-2 reactor core is assured by a restriction, contained in the proposed exemption, on the integrated power history.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed exemption involves systems located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20! -It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and, by minimizing the energy requirements required to obtain the nitrogen used in purging the containment, may have a positive environmental impact. Therefore,
e e the Conmission concludes there are no significant adverse non-radiological I
environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternative to the Proposed Action: Because the staff has concluded that l
there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the exemption, any alternative to the exemption will have either no impact or a greater environ-mental impact.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption. This would not reduce the environmental impacts of plant operation. Further, without the requested exemption, considerable delay will be incurred as the containment is deinerted and reinerted before and after containment entries by plant per-sonnel. Some risk to plant personnel will also be encountered. At.this point in the test program of the Fermi-2 facility, this process of deinerting and reinerting would significantly extend the time to complete the startup test phase i
and would produce unwarranted delays in power ascension.
Alternative Use of Resources: The action in the granting of this exemption does not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the " Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of Enrice Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit No. 2," (NUREG-0769) dated August 1981.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's requests that support the requested 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 requested exemption.
b q
4-Based upon the foregoing environmental' assessment, we conclude that the reouested action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the requests for the exemotion as listed herein, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D. C.
20555 and at the Monroe County Library, South Custer Road, Monroe, Michigan 48161.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 16th day of July 1986.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION EM I-Elinor G. Adensam, Director BWR Proiect Directorate No. 3 Division of BWR Licensina b
T-o 9
n_
p' 4
Exemption to General Design Criterion 56 of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50 DISTRIP.liTION :
Docket No. 50-341 NRC PDP Local PDF PRC System NSIC PWD-3 r/f MDLynch (2)
EHylton EAdensam Attorney, OELD CMiles PDiggs 1Partlow BGrimes Eilordan Luarmon TRarnhard (di EButcher 4
-