ML20246H167
| ML20246H167 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 03/09/1989 |
| From: | Capra R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246H170 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8903200034 | |
| Download: ML20246H167 (5) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ -
[/
.e 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION.
i BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY-CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 2
_ DOCKET NO. 50-318 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT i
I The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commissions is considering issuance of a one-time exemption from the requirements of 1
Sections III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of 10 CFR Part 50 and a temporary amendment to Unit 2 Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.6.1, " Containment Systems," to i
Facility Operating License No. DPR-69 issued to the Raltimore Gas and Electric Company. (the licensee) for operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, l
Unit No. 2, located in Calvert County, Maryland. The proposed temporary j
amendment and one-time exemption, submitted via the applications dated December 14 and 21, 1988, respectively, as supplemented on February 17, 1989, I
would provide up to a four week (28 days) extension to the maximum permissible.
retest interval of two years for Types 8 and C containment local leak rate l
tests (LLRTs).
NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT The Commission has found that the proposed exemption and amendment will not result in any additional significant environmental impact and has, therefore, determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement.
(
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Amendment and Exemption:
Currently,Section III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 and TS Surveillance Requirement 4.6.1.2.d require Types B and C LLRTs to be performed at intervals no greater than two years (24 months). The licensee s903200034 890309 I
.PDR ADOCK 0500 <!S l
P
l l
' i has requested a one-time exemption from Sections III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of l
Apoendix d and a temocracy amendment of TS d.6.1.2.d to provide a retest schedule extension, for Types B and C LLRTs, of up to four weeks (28 days) beyond the maximum two year interval. The proposed one-time exemption and I
temporary TS amendment are applicable to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant i
Unit 2 only, and would become effective at 11:59 p.m. on March 16, 1989 and i
expire at 11:59 p.m. on April 13, 1989.
j NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONS:
During the previous Unit 2 refuelirg outage, the LLRT program started at i
a date apparently too early to support the full Cycle 8 operating cycle, with the first LLRT completed on March 16, 1987.
I These actions are requested to permit Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 to complete its full Cycle 8 operating cycle rather than being forced to shutdown early on j
March'16, 1989 due to coming to the end of its maximum permitted Types B and C LLRT 2-year retest interval.
Cycle 8 was the first 24-month operating cycle at Calvert Cliffs Unit 2.
Alternatives to the Proposed Actions:
Since we have concluded that the environmental effects of the proposed action are negligible, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impac'ts need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested action. This would not significantly reduce the environmental impacts of plant operation but would result in a lower burnup of the fuel to be discharged from the Unit 2 core following Cycle 8 resulting in a higher concentration of U-235 in the discharged fuel.
Consequently, the radioactive life of the discharged fuel
[
]
would be longer than if it had been more fully burned, thus necessitating '
longer storage in a radioactive waste storage facility, and also, less economical use would have been made of the U-?35 contained in the discharged 3
fuel which would result in the utilization of additional natural resources to make up for the electrical energy output capacity lost by not burning the fuel more fully.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered by the Commission in the " Final Environmental Statement Relating to Operation of Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2" dated April 1973.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Actions:
The proposed actions would result in up to a 28 day extension to the 631 day interval allowed between performances of successive LLRTs. The historical performance of the Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 containment structure and a review of all Unit 2 Types B and C LLRT failures indicates that the integrity of the linit 2 containment would not be significantly affected by this one-time schedular extension of approximately 4% of the allowed surveillance interval.
Furthermore, the likelihood of an event requiring containment isolation and integrity, principally a loss of coolant accident (LC0A1, is very small during this short, one-time surveillance interval extension period.
For any significant increase in radiological environmental impact to result from this retest interval extension, a significant degradation in containment integrity subsequently followed by a LOCA, or another event
4 requiring containment isolation, would both be required to occur during the 28 day interval extension. As the likelihood of each ind?vidual occurrence during the extension is not significant, the probability of their happening in series during the interval extension is even smaller. On this basis, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption and TS amendment.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed actions involve features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20.
It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption or TS amendment.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
None FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on the aforementioned environmental assessment, the Commission has determined that the proposed exemption or amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action see:
(1) the applications for license amendment and exemption dated December 14 and 21, 1988, and (2) the licensee's supplemental letter dated February 17, 1989. These documents are
j I
I l l
i available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, N.W., Wasington, DC, and at the Calvert County Library, Prince i
Frederick, Maryland.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1
I i
Robert A. Capra, Director Pro,iect Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File NRC PDR Local PDR PDI-1 Rdg G. Lainas B. Roger R. Capra C. Vogan S. McNeil 0GC-15-B-18 E. Jordan-MNRB-3302 B. Grimes-9-A-2 ACRS (10)-P-315 GPA/PA-17-F-2 i
2 0FG : PDI-1
- PDI-1
- 0GG /
- PDI-l 3
:------------:------ g -:- E -
I NAME :CVocan J4'
- SMcNe H:vr : c il
- RCapra
- - - - - : - - - - - - - - - - -- : - - - -- - - - - - - - : 4 n b L U- : - - - - - - - - - - - - : - - - - - - - - - - - - : -
l fB I
l DATE : 3/ 4/89
- 3 /8 /89
- 3/f/89
- 3 / 8 /89 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY
J S
1 March 9,1989 l
-n j
Docket No. 50-318 DISTRIBUTION Docket file NRC PDR PDI-1 Rdg Local PDR
{
Glainas BBoger Mr. G. C. Creel RCapra SMcNeil j
Vice President-Nuclear Energy CVogan OGC i
Baltimore Cas and Electric Company EJordan BGrimes i
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant ACRS (10)
GPA/PA
)
MD Rtes 2 & 4 LTripp, RI j
Post Office Box 1535 i
Lusby, Maryland 20657 l
Dear Mr. Creel:
SUBJECT:
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT RELATING TO A SCHEDULAR EXTENSION FOR TYPES B AND C CONTAINMENT LOCAL LEAK RATE TESTS (TAC NO. 71589) j Enclosed is a copy of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact which relates to your December 14 and 21, 1988 applications, as supplemented on February 17, 1989, concerning an exemption l
from the requirements of Sections III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of Appendix J to 10 l
CFR Part 50 and a temporary amendment of Technical Specification 3/4.6.1, i
" Containment Systems," to permit a schedular extension of up to four weeks (28 days), beyond the maximum specified retest interval of two years for Types B and C containment local leak rate tests.
Sincerely, Original signed by j
Scott Alexander McNeil, Project Manager Project Directorate I-I Division of Reactor Projects I/II
Enclosure:
Environmental Assessment cc: See next page OFC :PDI-l
- PDI-l
- PDI-l
- 0G0
--:----- g --:-- Q ( g :
NAME :CVogan j
- SMcNe
- RCapra
- g DATE : 1/i/89
- .3/8/89
- 3 / S/89
- 3/9/89 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 10
$7 1QF UO,
s
0-Mr. G. C. Creel 4
Raltimore Gas & Electric Company Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant cc:
Mr. William T. Bowen, President Calvert County Board.of Commissioners Prince Frederick, Maryland 20768 D. A. Brune, Esq.
General Counsel Baltimom Gas and Electric Cornoany P. O. Box 1475 I
Raltimore, Maryland 21203 Mr. Jay E. Silberg, Eso.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Mr. W. J. Lippold, General Supervisor Technical Services Engineering Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant MD Rts 2 & d, P. O. Rox 1535 Lusby, Maryland 20657 Resident Inspector c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission P. O. Box 437 Lusby, Maryland 20657 Department of Natural Resources Energy Administration, Power Plant Sitirg Program ATTN: Mr. T. Magette Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, Maryland 21204 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King _of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 1
.\\
l I
i
e 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT.-UNIT NO. 2 1
DOCKET NO. 50-318
)
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The United States Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comissioni is considering issuance of a one-time exemption from tile requirements of Sections III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of 10 CFR Part 50 and a temporary amendment to Unit 2 Technical Specification (TS) 3/4.6.1, " Containment Systems," to Facility Operating License No. DPR-69 issued to the Raltimore Gas and Electric Company (the licensee) for operation ~ of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. ?, located in Calvert County, Maryland. The proposed temporary amendment and one-time exemption, submitted via the applications dated December 14 and 21, 1988, respectively, as supplemented on February 17, 1989, would provide up to a four week (28' days) extension to the maximum permissible retest interval of two years for Types 8 and C containment local leak rate tests (LLRTs).
NEED FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT The Comission has found that the proposed exemption and amendment will not result in any additional significant environmental impact and has, therefore, determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement.
[NVIRONMENTALASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Annndment and Exemption:
Currently,Section III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 and TS Surveillance Requirement 4.6.1.2.d require Types B and C LLRTs to be performed at intervals no greater than two years (24 months). The licensee
}((0Y'O
I I
t
-2 I
has requested a one-time exemption from Sections III.D.2(a) and III.D.3 of Apoenoix J and a temocrary amendment of Te a,6.1.2.d to provide a retest j
schedule extension, for Types 8 and C LLRTs, of up to four weeks (28 daysl beyond the maximum two year interval. The proposed one-time exemption and temporary TS amendment are applicable to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit 2 only, and would become effective at 11:59 p.m. on March 16, 1989 and expire at 11:59 p.m. on April 13, 1989.
NEED FOR THE PROPOSED ACTIONS:
During the previous Unit 2 refueling outage, the LLRT program started at a date apparently too early to support the full Cycle 8 operating cycle, with the first LLRT completed on March 16, 1987.
These actions are requested to pemit Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 to complete its full Cycle 8 operating cycle rather than being forced to shutdown early on March 16, 1989 due to coming to the end of its maximum pemitted Types B and C LLRT 2-year retest interval. Cycle 8 was the first 24-month operating cycle at Calvert Cliffs Unit 2.
Alternatives to the Proposed Actions:
Since we have concluded that the environmental effects of the proposed action are negligible, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be evaluated.
The principal alternative would be to deny the requested action. This would not significantly reduce the environmental impacts of plant operation but would result in a lower burnup of the fuel to be discharged from the Unit 2 core following Cycle 8 resulting in a higher concentration of U-235 in the discharged fuel.
Consequently, the radioactive life of the discharged fuel
i 4.
3-would be longer than if it had been more fully burned, thus necessitating inngar <*orage in a radioactive watte stcrage facility, and also, less econca;ical use woult' h:"? been made of the U-?35 contained in the discharged fuel which would result in the utilization of additional natural resources to make up for the electrical energy output capacity lost by not burning the fuel more fully.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously considered by the Consnission in the " Final Environmental Statement Relating to Operation of Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2" dated April 1973.
Environmental Impact of the Proposed Actions:
The proposed actions would result in up to a 28 day extension to the 631 day interval allowed between perfonnances of successive LLRTs. The historical performance of the Calvert Cliffs Unit 2 containment etructure and a review of all Unit 2 Types 8 and C LLRT failures indicates that the integrity of the Unit 2 containment would not be significantly affected by this one-time schedular extension of approximately 4% of the allowed surveillance interval.
Furthennore, the likelihood of an event requiring containment isolation and integrity, principally a loss of coolant accident (LC0A), is very small during this short, one-time surveillance interval extension period.
For any significant increase in radiological environmental impact to result from this retest interval extension, a significant degradation in containment integrity subsequently followed by a LOCA, or another event
4 4
requiring containment isolation, would both be required to occur during the 28 day interval extension. As the likelihood of each individual occurrence during the extension is not significant, the probability of their happening in t
series during the interval extension is even smaller. On this basis, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption and TS amendment.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed actions involve features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption or TS amendment.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
None FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT Based on the aforementioned environmental assessment, the Commission has determined that the proposed exemption or amendment will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment.
For further details with respect to this action see:
(1) the applications for license amendment and exemption dated December 14 and 21,1988, and (2) the licensee's supplemental letter dated February 17, 1989.
These documents are
, available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street N.W., Fasington, DC, and at the Calvert Ccunty Library, Prince Frederick, Maryland.
1 Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of l
1 l
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t
I Robert A. Capra, Director l
Pro,tect Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects I/II DISTRIBUTION:
Docket FU e NRC POR Local PDR PDI-1 Rdg G. Lainas k
B. Roger R. Capra C. Vogan S. McNeil OGC-15-B-18 E. Jordan-MNBB-3302 B. Grimes-9-A-2 ACRS (10)-P-315 GPA/PA-17-F-2 OFC :PDI-1
- PDI-I
- 0GC a f
- PDI-l
:------------:------ g -:- E.
NAME :CVogan M'
- SMcNeTT:vr : c il 1 RC
: ------------ : ------------ : 4 f1 A !'W U : - a p ra DATE : i/ i/89
- 3 /8 /89
- 3 / f /89
- 3 / 8 /89 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -