ML20138K699

Environ Assessment & Finding of No Significant Impact Re Util 850412 Application for Exemption from 10CFR50.44(c)(3)(iii) Requirements Re Installation of Reactor Vessel Head Vent

ML20138K699
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	12/11/1985
From:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML20138K678	List: ML20138K675 ML20138K699
References
TAC-57558, TAC-65453, NUDOCS 8512190029
Download: ML20138K699 (9)

Text

?

s 7590-01 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT DOCKET NO. 50-312 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Comission) is considering issuance of an exemption from a requirement of 10 CFR 50.44(c)(3)(iii) to the

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (the licensee), for the Rancho Seco

[ Nuclear Generating Station, located in Sacramento County, California.

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

, Identification of Proposed Action: The exemption would permit the licensee g not to install a reactor vessel head vent as required by 10 CFR 50.44(c)(3)(iii).

The exemption is responsive to the licensee's application for exemption dated April 12, 1985.

f i

The Need for the Proposed Action: The licensee has performed tests using the Once Through Integral Systen (OTIS) facility. The purpose of these tests was to determine if_ reactor core cooldown can be maintained in the absence of a vessel head vent to release noncondensible gases from the vessel during an accident. Based on results of the OTIS tests, tha licensee concluded that a reactor vessel head vent is not needed since other high point vents can be used to release gases. ~

Furthermore, the licensee has comitted to implement appropriate emergency procedures to assure reactor core cooling in the absence of a vessel head vent.

0512190029 ES1211 DR ADOCK 050 32 L

- ~. . . _-- -. . . - - - .- -.... - - - -

=

7590-01 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action: The proposed exemption, as

1 supported by the licensee's test results and commitment, will provide l l assurance of reactor core cooling that is equivalent to that requirad by 10 ^

CFR 50.44(c)(3)(iii) such that there is no increase in the risk of accidents i . at this facility. The probability of accidents will not be increased and the post-accident radiological releases will not be greater than previously

"' determined, nor will the proposed exemption otherwise affect radiological plant effluents. Therefore, the Comission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with this proposed

exemption, -

i With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed exemption involves features located entirely within the restricted area as defined in

. 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has

! t lt no other environmental impact. Therefore, the Comission concludes that

i. there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption, f Alternative Use of Resources: This action involves no use of resources not

,g previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement (construction permit and operating license) for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station.

Agencies and Persons Consulted: The Comission's staff reviewed the

! licensee's request and did not consult other agencies or persons. '

, FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmerital impact

statement for the proposed exemption.

Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, the Commission i

concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quali'.y of the human environment.

J r

t._

. . '590-01 For further details with respect to this action, see the application for the exemption dated April 12, 1985, which is available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Sacramento City-County Library, 828 i Street, Sacramento, California.

Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this lith day of December,1985.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGUL TORY COMMISSION I

i J PR n'F.Stolz,DirectorI6 roject Directorate sion of PWR Licensing-B -

I t

I t

i m

a i

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2o665

_ f nncket Fi$ GKalman Msmo File RWeller

%,***** OEC 11 1985 PBD-6 Rdg RIngram DOCKET No. 50-312 SMiner MEMORANDUM FOR: 85JIMMM#NI55NEIK5MdNim John Philips, Chief eMuwassamaquxusumusex Rules and Procedures Branch Office of Administration FROM: Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNIT NO.1 i

One signed original of the Federal Register Notice identified below is enclosed for your transmittal to the Office of the Federal .

Register for publication. Additional conformed copies ( ) of the Notice are enclosed for your use. [

t U 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 Licenseis): Time for Submission of Views on Antitrust Matters.

I Notice of Consideration of issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License.

U 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.

f I

Notice of Availability of NRC Draft / Final Environmental Statement.

U Notice of Limited Work Authorization, i

Notice of Availability of Safety Evaluation Report. l Notice of issuance of Ccnstruction Permit (s).

Notice of Issuance of Facility Operating License (s) or Amendment (s).

i Order.

l Exemption.

Notice of Granting of Relief.

C Other

Notice of Environmental Acemee==nt- and r. e. A- t.. ..,., a. s. u.m.c. i. 7- . 4. ,. 4. ,, .. .. .. .r ._ _ _ , . __

t concerning votrr reauest for examation dated Anell 12 l ans; .

u.+..

n t. ,. ...+ u.

l published no later than 12/20/85. -

l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation PWR Project Directorate 16

Enclosure:

As stated Division of PWRLicensing-B

. , > PBD 6

..Rin g ra, cp,,fn;c, , , , , , , , , - - - - -

=^"=> . . . . . . .. . ,, .

..r. > . 12/..t.\

.. . . ./. 85 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

F

. 7590-01 o

through nuclear power plant shutdown. These alternatives were addressed for the Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in the " Environmental Assessment by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Relating to the Second Modification of the Spent Fuel Storage Pool" dated November 8, 1984. -The referenced Environmental Assessment was issued in conjunction with a license amendment that granted an

.ingrease in storage capacity of the Ginna spent fuel pool to 1016 fuel assemblies.

Description and Need of Proposed Action Qt $j / 9 ff'[

1. d * & M er ::d '- th: Of d!c- "4 ^-* ^~--- "

81 spent fuel

-^--at hn:b

> assemblies belonging to Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation (RG&E) were located at what was formerly the NFS Facility, West Valley, New York. The current licensee of the West Valley Facility, New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), has placed a requirement on RG&E to remove all 81 spent fuel assemblies by early January 1986.

In conjunction with this, the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Manage-i ment of the Department of Energy (D0E) has requested that a " rod consolidation demonstration" at the West Valley Facility take place. Approximately 25 as-semblies of RG&E spent nuclear fuel from the Ginna reactor would be used for this program. Upon completion of the demonstration project t.ie reel would be shipped to Ginna and placed in the spent fuel pool. To accommodate the receipt and-storage of the consolidated fuel, a Technical Specification License Amendment must be granted by NRC.

h i

L

so C w m m e. o-7,rewY W& %.#A p%

e W P ' &%y' t a~y' Q e -

w

& -Aww w i rey a w 6

& % CCl~

s%sWs w &

r D 11 & &A &

- A u =cl a h &!

1. ' /w >- & lA ~ ~ M m

& Q

+W

? W ^/'"^" " Y ,

+-.

! 7590-01 Radiological Environmental Impact of Proposed Action The potential radiological environmental impact associated with the storage of spent nuclear fuel from the Ginna reactor in the spent fuel pool at Ginna in its current configuration was discussed and evaluated in the above-mentioned Environmental Assessment dated November 8, 1984. The findings detailed in that Environmental Assessment with regard to types and amounts of radioactivity released in the current pool configuration, the radioactivity released to the atmosphere, the types and volumes of liquid and solid radioactive wastes, the occupational radiation exposure and the radiological impact to the public from normal operations and accidents j still provide a boundingscenariowiththeproposedactionincluded.jeveEhbN]

Non-Radiological Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The findings in the above-mentioned Environmental Assessment with regard to non-radiological environmental impacts remain valid and still are bounding t 'd -

W#

1 F % with regard + to the e fe'ts W -Al pernatives to the 4' poffthe wlu

.oposed reposed A tion p..4actiony :4 M j

• fA0*'W AM' The only alternative to the proposed act on wou M e/o ny the license >

wp amendment, in which case the spent fuel would be shipped back to Ginna in an unconsolidated form in the same manner as the assemblies that are not M WM scheduled for the consolidation demonstration program. This alternative would M not lead to e r10;ced environmental impact over the proposed action. ,

~ .

b' m.

cr

. 7590-01

-/ Alternative Ube of Resources This action does not involve use of resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement dated December 1973 or the Environmental Evaluation of June 17, 1983 for the R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, nor does 3

it involve conflicting use of limited available resources requiring consideration of other alternatives.

Agencies and Persons Consulted The NRC has intsefaced with DOE and NYSERDA with regard to this action.

FINDING 0F NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l The staff has reviewed this proposed facility modification relative 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 assuciated with the proposed action and that the issuance of the proposed license 1

4 amendment will have no significant impact on the quality of the human environment.

1 Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, an environmental impact statement need not be prepared for this action.

For further details with respect of this action, see the application for amendment dated February 27, 1985 as supplemented June 10, June 25 and July 11, 1985 and the staff Environmental Assessment dated November 8, 1984 which are available for.public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room,

1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C., and at the Local Public Document Room at the Rochester Public Library, 115 South Avenue, Rochester, New York 14610.

i 4

C 4 ' 7590-01 Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this day of December, 1985.

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION George E. Lear, Director Project Directorate #1 Division of PWR Licensing-A 1

l 1