ML20236F492
| ML20236F492 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 07/28/1987 |
| From: | Butler W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236F496 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8708030363 | |
| Download: ML20236F492 (9) | |
Text
-__
7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY, ET. AL.
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATI^" UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AtlD 50-311 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Connission) is considering 1
issuance of a partial exemption from the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to Public Service Electric and Gas Company, et. al. (the licensee) for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, located at the licensee's site in Salem County, New Jersey.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Actions: Licensee's request for exemption and the bases therefore are contained in a letter dated April 11, 1986.
.:j letters
)
i dated August 29, 1986 and March 13, 1987, the licensee requested a slightly revised exemption that would additionally allow the door seal leakage rate test -
of III.D.2(b)(iii) to be used when the maintenance affecting the airlocks sealing capability was performed only on the door gaskets. The proposed exemption would partially relieve the licensee from the requirement of conducting a full 1
pressure airlock leakage test, pursuant to Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, whanever airlocks are opened during periods when contain-ment integrity is not required. Licensee would rely, instead, on the door seal leakage test described in Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii) when the airlocks are opened when the reactor is in cold shutdown (Mode 5) or refueling (Mode 6) and 8708030363 870728 DR ADOCK 0500 P 2
l t
' when no maintenance tas been performed on the airlock that could affect its sealing ability, unless the maintenance is performed only on the door seals (gaskets) themselves.
If maintenancethat coul' affect sealing ability has d
been performed on an airlock, other than the door gaskets, a full pressure airlock test.must still be performed. Door seal testing will be done after I
each opening, efter maintenance which could affect the airlock door gaskets, l
and prior to establishing containment integrity.
The Need for the Proposed Actions: The proposed exemption is from performance
)
1 ic of the leakage rate test required by Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, which takes at least 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> per airlock.
Exemption from full pressure leakage tests on airlocks opened during a period when containment l
integrity is not required, would provide the licensee with greater plant l
availability over the lifetime of the plant.
Environmental Impact of Proposed Actions: The proposed exemption would permit the substitution of an airlock seal leakage test (Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii) of Appendix J,10 CFR Part 50) for the full pressure airlock test otherwise required by Paragraph III.D.2.(b)(ii) when the airlock is opened while the reactor is in a cold shutdown or refueling moda.
If the tests required by l
III.D.2(b)(i) and (iii) are current, if no maintenance (other than on door gaskets) has been performed on the airlock, and if the airlock has been properly sealed, this exemption will not affect containment integrity and does not affect the risk of facility accidents. Thus, post-accident radiological releases will not be greater than previously determined nor does the proposed exemption otherwise affset radiological plant effluents, nor result in any
significant occupational exposure. Likewise, the exemption does not affect nnn-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, the Comission concludes that there are no significant radio-logical or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternative to the Proposed Actions: Because we have concluded that there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives to the exemption will have either no environmental impact or j
greater environmental impact.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption.
Such action would not reduce environmental impacts of Salem Units 1 and 2 operations i
and would result in reduced operational flexibility or unwarranted delays in i
power ascension.
Alternative Use of Resources: These actions do not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the " Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2," dated April 1973.
Agencies and Persens Consulted: The NRC reviewed the licensee's request that supports the proposed exemption. The NRC staff did not consult other' agencies or persons.
FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that the proposed exemption will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
1,
For further details with respect to the proposed actions, see'the licensee's requests for the exemption dated April 11, 1986, August 29, 1986, and March 13, 1997, which are availabl,e for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Salem Free' County Public Library,112 W. Broadway, Salem, New Jersey q
08079.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this28th day of July 1987.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WJ1no Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II
' t I
M i
1 1
-. D
. DISTRIIKFfION w/enclosura
- Docket 7Fileg
- PDI-2" Reading-DFischer/MThadani M0'Brien 4
July 28,1987 FIngram, M / M 1
DOCKET NO.
50-272/311 Rules and Procedures Branch MEMORANDUM FOR:
Division of Rules and becords Office of Administration
.1 FROM:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
SUB.iECT:
M N NN MMNsM M PUBLIC SERVICE m.amnIC A80 GAS COMPANI i
One signed original of the Federal Reglsfer Notice identified below is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal Register for publication. Additional conformed copies (
5
) of the Notice are enclosed for your use.
i Notice of Receipt of Application for Construction Permit (s) and Operating License (s).
Notice of Receipt of Partial Application for Construction Permit (s)and Facility l
License (s): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.
Notice of Consideration of issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License.
i Notice of Receipt of Application for Facility License (s); Notice of Availability of Applicant's Environmental Report; and Notice of Consideration of issuance of Facility License (s) and Notice of Opportunity for Hearing.
Notice of Availability of NRC Draf t/ Final Environmental Statement.
Notice of Limited Work Authonzation.
i Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report.
Notice of issuance of Construction Permit (s).
Notice of issuance of Facility Operating License (s) or Artiendment(s).
Order.
Exemption.
Notice of Granting Exemption.
Environmental Assessment.
Notice of Preparation of Environmental Assessment.
Other:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated
Contact:
M. O'Brien Phone:
, gg OmCW OURNAME>
DATE>
une ronM sie noisol NRCM oho '
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
o-7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
PUBLIC SERVICE ELECTRIC AND GAS COMPANY, ET. AL.
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 i
DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT-AND FINDING OF N0 SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission (the Commission) is considering issuance of a partial exemption from the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to Public Service Electric and Gas Company, et. al. (the licensee) for the Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, located at the licensee's j
site in Salem County, New Jersey.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Actions: Licensee's request for exemption and the bases therefore are contained in a letter dated April 11, 1986.
By letters dated August 29, 1986 and March 13, 1987, the licensee requested a slightly-revised exemption that would additionally allow the door seal leakage rate test.
of III.D.2(b)(iii) to be used when the maintenance affecting the airlocks sealing
)
capability was' performed only on the door gaskets. The proposed exemption j
would partially relieve the licensee from the requirement of conducting a full pressure airlock leakage test, pursut.nt to Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii)' of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, whenever airlocks are opened during periods when contain-ment integrity is not required. Licensee would rely, instead, on the door seal leakage test described in Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii) when-the airlocks are opened when the reactor is in cold shutdown (Mode 5) or refueling (Mode 6) and L
_J
i
- s
. when no maintenance has been performed on the airlock that could affect its sealing ability, unless the maintenance is performed only on the door seals (gaskets) themselves.
If maintenance.that could affect sealing ability has been performed. on an airlock, other than the ' door gaskets, a full pressure airlock test must still be performed. Door seal testing will be done after each opening, after maintenance which could affect the airlock door gaskets,
)
and prior to establishing containment integrity.
The Need for the Proposed Actions: The proposed exemption is from performance of the leakage rate test required by Paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, which takes at least 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> per airlock.
Exemption from full pressure leakage tests on airlocks opened during a period when containment integrity is not required, would provide the licensee with greater plant availability over the lifetime of the plant.
Environmental Impact of Proposed Actions: The proposed exemption would permit the substitution of an airlock seal leakage test (Paragraph III.D.2(b)(iii) of Appendix J,10 CFR Part 50) for the full pressure airlock test otherwise required by Paragraph III.D.2.(b)(ii) when the airlock is opened while the reactor is in a cold shutdown or refueling mode.
If the tests required by III.D.2(b)(1) and (iii) are current, if no maintenance (other than on door gaskets) has been performed on the airlock, and if the airlock has been properly sealed, this exemption will not affect containment integrity and does not affect the risk of facility accidents. Thus, post-accident radiological releases will not be greater than previously determined nor does the proposed exemption otherwise affect radiological plant effluents, nor result in any
s
's 2 !
l significant occupational exposure. Likewise, the exemption does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has other environmental imp (ct.
.Therefore, the Cormiission concludes that there are no significant radio-logical or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Alternative to the proposed Actions: Because we have concluded that there is no measurable environmental impact associated with the proposed exemption, any alternatives to the exemption will have either no environmental impact or l
greater environmental impact.
l The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption. Such action would not reduce environmental impacts of Salem Units 1 and 2 operations i
and would result in reduced operational flexibility or unwarranted delays in i
power ascension.
Alternative Use of Resources: These actions do not involve the use of resources not previously considered in connection with the " Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2," dated April 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted: The NRC reviewed the licensee's request that supports the proposed exemption.
The NRC staff did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDINGS OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we c m clude that the proposed exemption will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed exemption.
4
- *4 A
_4-9 For further details with respect to the proposed actions, see the licensee's requests for the exemption dated April 11, 1986, August 29, 1986, and March 13, 1987, which are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Do ment Room, 1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Salem ~ Free County Public Library,112 W. Broadway, Salem, New Jersey 08079.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland thisamt day of JLdy 1987.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
i Walter R. Butler, Director Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects I/II l
t i