[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 32 (Thursday, February 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9056-9057]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3876]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-219]
GPU Nuclear Corporation; Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No.
DPR-16, issued to GPU Nuclear Corporation, (the licensee), for
operation of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, located in
Ocean County, New Jersey.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would change the setpoints of Technical
Specification 2.3.D, ``Reactor High Pressure, Relief Valve Initiation''
by increasing the setpoint value by 15 psig for each of the
Electromatic Relief Valve (EMRVs) in the Automatic Depressurization
System.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for amendment dated June 15, 1994, as supplemented by
letter dated September 23, 1994, and November 3, 1994.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed because the ``Bourden tube'' type
pressure switches currently in use at Oyster Creek experience drift,
which results in exceeding the existing ``as found'' setpoint.
Increasing the specified setpoints by 15 psig will provide for
expanding the ``as found'' tolerance bands. Increasing these tolerance
bands serves to ensure that the setpoints will remain within the
Technical Specification requirements [[Page 9057]] over a nominal 24
month operating cycle.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the licensee has provided information supporting the
use of a 1.04 multiplier. This multiplier is applied to pool dynamic
loads previously calculated for the plant unique analysis report
(PUAR), to account for the EMRV setpoint increase and to account for
errors in calculations of the PUAR loads due to use of an incorrect
EMRV flow rating. The staff has reviewed the licensee's basis for use
of the multiplier and finds it acceptable. The staff also finds that
the structural analysis of the affected plant components was adequately
conservative to demonstrate acceptability of the EMRV setpoint change.
The proposed amendment involves a minor change in the operation of
the facility. The change will not increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of
any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant
increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational
radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there
are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does 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. Accordingly, the
Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be
evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff
considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application
would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action
are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, the staff consulted with the
New Jersey State official regarding the environmental impact of the
proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes
that the proposed action 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 action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated June 15, 1994, as supplemented by letters dated
September 23, and November 3, 1994, which are available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public
document room located at the Ocean County Library, 101 Washington
Street, Tows River, NJ 08753.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of February 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Phillip F. McKee,
Director, Project Directorate I-4, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-3876 Filed 2-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
