ML20237E105

Forwards Environ Assessment Re 861124 Application for Amend to License DPR-61,changing Expiration Date from 040526 to 070629.Notice of Issuance of Environ Assessment & Finding of No Significant Impact Also Encl

ML20237E105
Person / Time
Site:	Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date:	11/23/1987
From:	Frank Akstulewicz Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Mroczka E CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO.
Shared Package
ML20237E106	List: ML20237E105 ML20237E115
References
NUDOCS 8712280160
Download: ML20237E105 (4)

Text

__________ _ .

November 23, 1987 Doci . No.: 50-213 Mr. Edward J. Mroczka, Senior Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROPOSED LICENSE EXTENSION Re: Haddam Neck Plant Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment relating to your November 24, 1986, application for license amendment. The proposed amendment would change the expiration date for the Haddam Neck Plant Facility Operating License, No. DPR-61 from May 26, 2004, to June 29, 2007.

A copy of a Notice of Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, which will be published in the Federal Register, is also enclosed.

Sincerely,

/s/

Francis M. Akstulewicz, Jr., Project Manager Integrated Safety Assessment Project Directora', a Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects

Enclosures:

DISTRIBUTION:

As stated ,6C " NRC & Local PDR ISAPD RF DCrutchfield MBoyle ADR4 cc: See next page FAkstulewicz MShuttleworth OGC-Bethesda EJordan JPartlow ACRS (10)

JMinns

• See previous concurrence sheet

,)

0FC :ISAPD* ISAPD* :AD:ISAPD4 0GC- a:

. . . M1 ::

NAME :FAkstulewicz:dr MShuttleworth :MBoyle: M

.. _ _:10/19/87 DATE _ : .. . ..: .. . .. _ _10/29/87

_ _ . ._ _:10/30'87

_ _ _ . . :: .. . . . . ._ _ _ . . : _ _ _ _ . .. .) . _

0FFICIAL RECORD COPY h22ggg$h!g3 p9 P

\ .

I November 23, 1987 Docket No.: 50-213

{

Mr. Edward J. Mroczka, Senior Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270

SUBJECT:

Environmental Assessment for Proposed License Extension RE: Haddam Neck Plant Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment relating to your November 24, 1986 application for license amendment. The proposed amendment would change the expiration date for the Haddam Neck Plant Operating License, DPR-61 from May 26, 2004 to June 29, 2007.

A copy of a Notice of Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, which will be published in the Federal Register, is also erclosed.

Sincerely,

/s/

Francis M. Akstulewicz, Jr., Project Manager Integrated Safety Assessment Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects Enclocures: DISTRIBUTION:

As st?trJ Docket File NRC & Local PDR ISAPD RF 0Crutchfield CThomas FSchroeder cc: See next page FAkstulewicz MShuttleworth OGC-Bethesda EJordan JPartlow ACRS (10)

JMinns 0FC :ISAPD

/A M4 ISAPD .:AD:ISAPD :0GC-Bethesda:

...__:_..___. . f : 1. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : . . . . . .p. . : _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ : _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NAME :FAkstulev cz:dr MShuttle' worth :MBoyle:

DATE:10/19/87  : 10/ppf87 :10/ /87 :10/ /87:

' 0FFICIAL~ RECORD COPY

1

=

1. pa onc 'o

~,, UNITED STATES 8 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0

IE WASMNGTON, D. C. 20555

\...../

Docket No.: 50-213 November 23, 1987 Mr. Edward J. Mroczka, Senior Vice President Nuclear Engineering and Operations l Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270

SUBJECT:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PROPOSED LICENSE EXTENSTION Re: Haddam Neck Plant Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment relating to your November 24, 1986, application for license amendment. The proposed amendment would change the expiration date for the Haddam Neck Plant Facility Operating License, No. DPR-61 from May 26, 2004, to June 29, 2007. -

A copy of a Notice of Issuance of Environmental. Assessment and Finding of No Significant Inipact, which will be published in the Federal Register, is also enclosed.

Sincerely, j /1

.' . . pan. ,GA

rancis M. Akstulewicz, J .y Project Manager Integrated Safety Assessment Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, V and Special Projects

Enclosures:

As stated cc: See next page t

)

l l

Mr. Edward J. Mroczka Haddam Neck Plant Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company cc: Gerald Garfield, Esquire Kevin McCarthy, Director Day, Berry & Howard Radiation Control Unit Counselors at Law Department of Environmental City Place Protection Hartford, Connecticut 06103-3499 State Office Building Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Superintendent Richard M. Kacich, Manager Haddam Neck Plant Generation Facilities Licensing RFD #1 Northeast Utilities Service Company Post Office Box 127E Post Office Box 270 East Hampton, Connecticut 06424 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Wayne D. Romberg Donald O. Nordquist, Director Vice President, Nuclear Operations Quality Services Department Northeast Utilities Service Company Northeast Utilities Service Department Post Office Box 270 Post Office Box 270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Hartford, Connecticut 06141-0270 Board of Selectmen Town Hall Haddam, Connecticut 06103 Bradford S. Chase, Under Secretary Energy Division Office of Policy and Management 80 Washington Street Hartford, Connecticut 06106 Resident Inspector Haddam Neck Nuclear Power Station c/o U.S. NRC P. O. Box 116 East Haddam Post Office l

East Haddam, Connecticut 06423 t Regional Administrator, Region I I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue l l

King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 l

D ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION RELATING TO THE CHANGE IN EXPIRATION DATE OF FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. DRP-61 CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY HADDAM NECK PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-213 i

_, ,)

,_ _______________________o

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION

.......................................................... 1 2.0 NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTI0N........................................... I 1 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTI0N.......................... 1 3.1 R a di ol og i c al Impa c ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 3.1.1 Environmental Impacts - General Public.................... 2 l 3.1.2 Environmental Impacts - Uranium Fuel Cycle................ 3 3.1.3 Environmental Impacts - Occupational Exposures............ 4 3.1.4 Environmental Impacts - Transportation of Fuel and Waste................................................. 5 3.2 Non-Radiological Impacts......................................... 6 3.2.1 E n v i ronme nt al E f fec ts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 l 3.2.2 Economic Impacts.......................................... 6 3.2.3 Plant Design Changes...................................... 7 4.0 ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROPOSED ACTI0N.................................... 8 5.0 ALTERNATI VE USE OF RES0VRCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 i i

6.0 AGENCIES AND PERSONS C0NSULTED........................................ 8 7.0 BASIS AND CONCLUSIONS FOR NOT PREPARING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT I STATEMENT............................................................. 9 8.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT....................................................... 9 i

i i

l

[ v

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The currently licensed term for the Haddam Neck Plant is 40 years commencing with issuance of the construction permit (May 26,1964).

Accounting for the time that was required for plant construction, this.

represents an effective operating license term of 36 years,10 months, and 26 days. The licensee's application dated November 24, 1986, requests a 40-year operating license term for the Haddam Neck Plant.

2.0 THE NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTION The granting of the proposed license amendment would allow the licensee to operate the Haddam Neck Plant for slightly more than 3 years beyond the currently approved date.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION In October 1973, the Atomic Energy Commission issued the " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Haddam Neck (Connecticut Yankee)

Nuclear Power Plant" (FES). This document provides an evaluation of the environmental impact associated with operation of the Haddam Neck Plant.

The NRC staff has reviewed this document to determine if any significant environmental impacts, other than those previously considered, would be associated with the proposed license extension.

3.1 Radiological Impacts The staff considered the radiological impacts expected as a result of a hypothetical design basis accident at Haddam Neck and from normal plant operation including the impact of revised population estimates.

In previous documents (Safety Evaluation Report, July 1971 and FES October 1973), the staff evaluated the regional demography for Haddam Neck and found the land area within a 25 mile radius, as indicated by the population statistics, to be about 20 percent

woodlands, and much of it is state parks and forests. The remaining area is devoted primarily to general farming and some minor industry.

The Haddam Neck FES projected a 30 percent increase in population within 50 miles of the Haddam Neck facility from 1970 to 1980, and a 60 percent increase from 1970 to 1990. Based on 1980 census data, there was an approximately 20 percent increase in'popu-lation within the 50 miles surrounding the Haddam Neck facility between 1970 and 1980. The Haddam Neck FES, however, predicted a populat?9n growth rate of 30 percent between the 1970 census and the 1980 census.

The increase in population distribution predicted in the Haddam Neck Final Environment Statement was overly conservative.

The population within 50 miles of the plant was 2,937,764 in 1970, 3,345,000 in 1980, and projected to be 4,682, 253 for the year 1990.

The area surrounding the site experiences a small seasonal increase in population due to a number of summer resorts, recreational facilities, lakeside, and riverside cottages located within a 10 mile radius.

The Haddam Neck plant low population zone (LPZ) was redefined in the Haddam Neck's Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (tlFSAR),

February 1987. Tne LPZ was changed from a radius of 7.2 miles to a radius of 2.7 miles from the site in conformance with 10 CFR 100.11.

The nearest population center with more than 36,000 people is the city of Middleton, Connecticut, whose nearest boundary is about six miles from the Haddam Neck reactor building. The staff concludes, based upon these population estimates, that the current Exclusion Area Boundary, Low Population Zone, and nearest population center distances were conservatively estimated. Therefore, the conclusion reached in the staff's Safety Evaluation in 1973, that Haddam Neck meets the requirements of 10 CFR Part 100, remains unchanged.

3.1.1 Environmental Impacts - General Public In the FES, the staff also calculated the dose to the human population residing around Haddam Neck in order to assess the impact on people from radioactive material released as part of the normal l

l . . _ _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _

operation of the plant. The annual dose commitment was defined to be the dose that would be received over a 50-year period following the intake of radioactivity for one year under the conditions that would exist 15 years after the plant began operation. The 15-year period was chosen as representing the midpoint of plant life and was incorporated into the dose model by allowing for buildup of long life radionuclides in the soil. The buildup factor mainly affects the estimated doses for radionuclides with half-lives greater than a few years that are ingested by humans. For a plant licensed for 40 years, increasing the buildup period from 15 to 20 years would increase the dose from long-life radionuclides via the ingestion oathway by less than one-third. It would have much less of an effect on a dose from shorter-lived radionuclides. Table V-5.12 of the FES indicates that the estimated doses via the ingestion pathways are well below the annual dose design objectives of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I. For example, the ingestion dose to the thyroid from (radionuclides) releases at Haddam! N eck is 2.1 mrem /yr compared to a dose design objective of 15 mrem /yr. Thus, the staff concludes that an increase of even as much as one-third in these pathways would remain well below the dose design objectives of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I and would not be significant.

Additionally, the total-population doses from effluent releases have been well below projected values (NUREG/CR-2850. Volume 4, June 1986; Annual Environmental Report, 1985). The Haddam Neck annual offsite dose calculation values are well below pressurized water reactor (PWR) averages, and have typically been so for each year of operation. These lower values are expected to remain typical for Haddam Neck operations through the year 2007. Thus, an increase of even as much as 10 percent in these pathways would remain well below the Appendix I guidelines and would not be significant.

1

3.1.2 Environmental Impacts - Uranium Fuel Cycle The impacts on the uranium fuel cycle considered for the FES were originally based on 30 years of operation of a model light water reactor (LWR). The fuel requirements for the model LWR were assumed to be one initial core load and 29 annual refuelings (approximately 1/3 core per refueling). In considering the annual fuel requirements for 40 years for the model LWR, fuel use is aversged over a 40 year operating life (one initial core and 39 refuelings of approximately 1/3 core each) which results in a slight reduction compared to the annual fuel requirement averaged over a 30 year operating life. The net result is approximately 1.5 percent reduction in the annual fuel requirements for the model LWR due to averaging the initial core load over 40 years, instead of 30 years. This small reduction in fuel requirements would not lead to significant changes in the annual impacts on the uranium fuel cycle.

l l

For Haddam Neck, the licensee projects two additional refueling cycle years to a total of 28 cycles over the plant lifetime. The staff concludes that there will not be any changes to the FES with regard to uranium fuel cycle impact in order to consider 40 years of operation.

If anything, the values in the FES become more conservative when a 40 year period of operation is considered, particularly since the licensee is extending the refueling cycle intervals from 14 months to 16 months, 3.1.3 Environmental Impacts - Occupational Exposures The staff has evaluated the licensee's dose assessment for the years 2004 to 2007 (the additional years during which Haddam Neck would operate), and compared it with current Haddam Neck and overall industry occupational dose experience. The average cumulative occupational dose for Haddam Neck over the five year period covering 1980-1984 has been 1,043 person-rem per year, which is high compared to the E-________-----------__--- - - - - --

i current five year average of 569 person-rem dose per unit per year for operating PWRsin the United States. (The high doses were due to steam generator outages and poor primary side chemistry controls which were labor extensive). The staff expects that Haddam Neck will incur an average annual dose of less than 1,000 person-rem for each additional year of operation. This is only a small fraction of the 271,183 person-rem accumulated by all operating reactors over a l

similar five year period (1980-1984). The staff expects that increased -

l doses from maintenance and corrosion product buildup will be offset by a continually improving ALARA program, dose-saving plant modifi-

{

cations, and fewer major modifications. Haddam Neck has been above average in numbers of workers (1,410) receiving measurable doses, compared to other U.S. PWRs (1,089 average number of workers receiving measurable dose for 1980-1984). Overall, annual occupational radiation exposures can be expected to remain about as estimated in the FES and as experienced during the initial operation period.

Spent fuel will be stored in the spent fuel pool (previously evaluated by the staff for radiological environmental consequences) in lieu of shipment offsite as stated in the FES, and in accordance with current national policy. Any further expansion of on-site spent fuel storage capability (such as through rod consolidation) will be further evaluated for radiological environmental . effects by the NRC staff at the time it is proposed.

The staff concludes that the licensee's occupational dose assessment is acceptable, and their Radiation Protection Program is adequate to ensure that occupational radiation exposures will be maintained ALARA and in continued compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20.

3.1.4 Environmental Impacts - Transportation of Fuel and Waste  ;

i The staff reviewed the environmental impacts attributable to the transportation of fuel and waste to and from the Haddam Neck site.

With respect to the normal conditions of transport and possible

accidents in transport, the staff concludes that the environmental impacts are bounded by those identified in Table S-4, " Environmental Impact of Transportation of Fuel and Waste To and From One Light Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor," of 10 CFR Part 51.52. Table S-4 is based on an annual refueling and an assumption of 60 spent-fuel shipments per reactor year. Presently, Haddam Neck is on a 14-to-16-months refueling cycle which would reouire less than 30 spent fuel shipments per reactor year. Reducing the number of fuel shipments will reduce the overall impacts related to popt ^a tion exposure and accidents discussed in Table S-4; and (2) Table S-4 represents the contribution of such transportation to annual radiation dose per reactor year to exposed transportation workers and to the l general public. Currently, fuel enrichment and average fuel inad-iation levels slightly exceed those specified in 10 CFR 51.52(a)(2) l and (3) as the bases for Table S-4. The radiation levels of the l transport fuel casks are limited by the Department of Transportation I and are not dependent on fuel enrichment and/or irradiation levels.

i Therefore, the estimated doses to exposed individuals per reactor year will not increase over that specified in Table S-4.

I Haddam Neck has averaged less than half the volume of solid rad-waste shipped by the average PWR over the period 1980-1985, and ranks mid-range in overall volume of radwaste shipped during this same period. Occupational doses and population doses from radwaste processing and shipping are well within the estimates made in the FES.

Radioactive waste shipments are expected to remain at about the present level for the remaining life of the plant.

3.2 Non-Radiological Impacts 3.2.1 Environmental Effects The use of the Haddam Neck site and associated transmission facilities for electrical production was originally considered in the FES. Such impacts are not altered by the proposed extension in that no changes n - . .

to the facility or its operation tre involved. Further, land use surrounding the site remains essentially ~ unchanged. Thus, the balance originally struck betym n costs and benefits will remain valid ,

throughout the extended period of operation.

To date, no significant impacts have been found due to thermal or chemical discharges or from the withdrawal of cooling water from the Connecticut River. The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection administers the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination i System (NPDES) permit and has set forth conditions and limits expressly designed to protect indigenous fish, shellfish and wildlife. No alteration of those conditions would occur as a result of the extended period of operation.

3.2.2 Economic Impacts The proposed extension would produce some economic benefits. Fi rst, an approximate three-year extension of the operating life of the facility would lower nominal revenue requirements by over $400 million, or more than $60 million in present worth terms (to January 1987).

The principal. reason-for such savings is that the New England region prefers base-load capacity as a replacement for Haddam Neck upon its retirement. Therefore, extending the unit's life would delay the timing of such replacement capacity by the length of the extension period. The estimated costs of a three-year extension are far lower than the costs associated with delaying an equivalent amount of new base-load capacity.

4 Additional economic effects not considered in this estimate include continued contribution to the local property tax base, the effect of payroll and other expenditures for goods and services on consnunities surrounding the facility, and the benefit from the continued use of an existing generating site, which defers the need to site a new facility on a new location.

m

3.2.3 Plant Design Change Many modifications and design changes have taken place at the Haddam Neck Plant since the FES was issued. Those that are safety related or important to safety or require a change to the Facility Operating License or Technical Specifications are submitted to the NRC for review and approval prior to implementation in accordance with 10 CFR Part 50. This review and approval process includes a determina-tion of the environmental effects both radiological and non-radiological of the proposed change. Changes that are determined to be outside the scope of those listed above may be implemented by the licensee without prior NRC approval; however, the licensee must have first completed a safety analysis with respect to the proposed change and retain a copy of this analysis on site for NRC inspection and audit.

A description of the changes including a summary of the associated ss'ety analysis is then submitted to the NRC as part of the CYAPC0 Annual Report. A complete detailed description of the changes and their impact on plant operations and procedures is also included where applicable in required annual updates of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Both the Annual Report and FSAR updates are reviewed by the staff to verify that the licensee has correctly determined that these changes did not require prior NRC review and approval. In general, these changes improve plant reliability.and do not adversely impact the environment. All changes are conducted in accordance with approved procedures, current license requirements and Technical Specifications and the current NPDES permit. While it is recognized that the requested license extension will require further routine design changes and modifications similar in nature to those already conducted, it is not anticipated that these would have any adverse I

effect on the environment.

i l

4.0 ALTERNATIVE TO THE PROPOSED ACTION The principal alternative to issuance of the proposed license extension would be to deny the application. In this case, the Haddam Neck Plant  !

would shut down upon expiration of the present operating license.

l

.g.

Current planning assumptions for the costs and operating character-istics of new generation f acilities along with long-term projections of nuclear and fossil fuel prices, indicate that the least costly choices for base-load generation in the years beyond 2000 include the so-called " clean" coal technologies, (e.g., fluidized bed combustion or a coal gasification facility fueling a combined cycle plant). Both technologies (nuclear and

" clean" coal) have substantially similar total costs if built in New England.

Estimates of comparable system fuel savings indicate that substantial cost savings for the Haddam Neck Plant consumers would appear to be realized from the displacement of existing or other potential generation resources by extending the operating life of the Haddam Neck Plant.

In sumary the initial cost / benefit arguments and conclusions presented in the FES for the Haddam Neck Plant are strengthened by extension of the operating license. .

5.0 ALTERNATIVE USE OF RESOURCES This action does not involve the use of resources not previously con-sidered in connection with the " Final Environmental Statement Related to the Haddam Neck (Connecticut Yankee) Nuclear Power Plant" dated October 1973.

6.0 AGENCIES AND PERSONS CONSilLTED The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons.

7.0 BASIS AND CONCLUSION FOR NOT PREPARING AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT The staff has reviewed the proposed license amendment rel3tive to the requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based on this assessment, the staff concludes that there are no significant radiological or non-radiological impacts associated with the proposed action and that the issuance of the l_, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

proposed license amendment will have no significant impact on the quality of the human environment. Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, an environ-mental impact statement need not be prepared for this action.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 23rd day of November 1987. '

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e

Michael L. Bo e, Acting Director Integrated Safety Assessment ProjectDirectorate Division of Reactor Projects - I?I, IV, V and Special Projects

_ ______ _______________________- ______ -_-_____-_________ _