ML20245H864
| ML20245H864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 08/11/1989 |
| From: | Matthews D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245H869 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8908170321 | |
| Download: ML20245H864 (4) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _. _ _
(.
m L.:..
\\>
7590-01
' ' UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY' COMMISSION GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, ET AL.
DOCKET NGS. 50-424-AND 50-425 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The United States-Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-68 and NPF-81 to the Georgia Power Company, et al., (the licensee) for the Vogtle. Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2, located on the licensee's site in Burke County, Georgia.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of Proposed Action The proposed amendments would revise the provision in the Technical Specifications (TS) relating to reload fuel enrichment.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's applications dated June 12 and July 17, 1989.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed changes are needed so that the licensee can use higher enrichment fuel, increase flexibility by extending fuel irradiation, and permit operation of longer fuel cycles.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The proposed TS revisions would permit use of fuel enriched with Uranium 235 in excess of 4 weight percent and up to 4.55 weight percent and the licensee would expect the fuel to be irradiated to levels above 33 gigawatt days per metric ton (GWD/MT), but not to exceed 36 GWD/MT. The safety considerations 8908170321 890814
~
PDR ADOCK 05000424 P
h,' ;
~
associated with fuel storage and reactor operations with higher enrichment Ll:
and extended irradiation have been evaluated by the licensee. The licensee has concluded that such changes would not adversely affect plant safety.
The proposed changes have no effect on the probability of any accident.
The increased burnup was considered in the original safety analyses and, therefore, does not change the analysis of fission products that might be released in the event of a serious accident.
No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any radiological effluents that may be released i
offsite. There.is no significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts of reactor operation with higher enrichment and extended irradiation, the proposed changes to the TS involve systems located within the restricted areas, as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect nonradiological plant effluents and have no other environmental impact.
The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use of higher enrichment fuel and extended irradiation are discussed in the NRC staff's assessment entitled "NRC Assessment of the divironmental Effects of Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel Enrichment and Irradiation,"
dated July 7,1988. This assessment was published in the August 11, 1988 Federal Register (53 FR 30355) as part of the Carolina Power and Light Co.,
et al., Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Environmental Impact Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the utilization of higher enriched fuel and extended fuel irradiation and is hereby referenced for this Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.
As
y iL
h indicated therein, the environmental cost contributions of the proposed increase,in the fuel enrichment and irradiation limits are either unchanged or may in fact be reduced from those summarized in Table S-4, as set forth in 10 CFR 51.52(c).
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no i
significant radiological or nonradiologic61 environmental impacts i
associated with the proposed amendments.
Alternative to the Prod.osed Action:
Since the Commission has concluded that there are no significant environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any alternatives would have equal or greater environmental impact.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendments..
This would not reduce environmental impacts of plant operations and would result in reduced operational flexibility.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action coes not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the " Final Environmental Statement related to the operation of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units I and E" dated May 1985.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's request that supports the proposed amendment.
The NRC staff did not consult other agencies or persons.
FINDING OF NO SIGilIFICANT IMPACT The Comission has determined not to prepare an environmental inpact statenient for the proposed license amencuents.
.. y-
,4
.K
- Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment,.we conclu'de that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For'further details with respcct to this action, see the request for the amendments. dated June 12, 1989, supplemented July. 17, 1989 which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, N. W., Washington, D.C.
20555, and at the Burke County
^
Library, 412 4th Street, Waynesboro, Georgia 30830.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this lith day of August 1989.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Original signed by:
David B. Matthews, Director Project Directorate 11-3 Division of Reactor Projects I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i
[V0GTLE EA-ENRICHMENT 73595/96)
Ph -3 PDdIq3
'JHop kins:sa DKatthews
'7 //7/89
]
/89 7 g)/ 9 f/l1/89
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _