[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 15945-15946]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7695]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Virginia Electric & Power Co.; North Anna Power Station, Unit No.
2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an exemption from Facility Operating License
No. NPF-7, issued to Virginia Electric and Power Company (the
licensee), for operation of the North Anna Power Station, Unit No. 2
(NA-2) located in Louisa County, Virginia.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
This Environmental Assessment has been prepared to address
potential environmental issues related to the licensee's application of
March 2, 1995. The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraph III.D.1.(a), to
the extent that a one-time interval extension for the Type A test
(containment integrated leak rate test) by approximately 16 months from
the March 1995 refueling outage to the October 1996 refueling outage
would be granted. In addition, the proposed action would exempt the
licensee from a portion of Section IV.A that requires a Type A test to
be performed following a major modification or replacement of a
component which is part of the primary reactor containment boundary.
Specifically, the post-modification exemption is requested from
performing a Type A test due to the activities associated with the
upcoming NA-2 steam generator replacement.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to permit the licensee to defer the
Type A tests from the NA-2 March 1995 refueling steam generator
replacement outage to the October 1996 refueling outage, thereby saving
the cost of performing the test and eliminating the test period from
the critical path time of the outage.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the proposed one-time exemptions would not increase
the probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and
the proposed one-time exemptions would not affect facility radiation
levels or facility radiological effluents. The licensee will continue
to be required to conduct the Type B and C local leak rate tests which
historically have been shown to be the principal means of detecting
[[Page 15946]] containment leakage paths with the Type A tests
confirming the Type B and C test results. The planned replacement of
the NA-2 steam generators affects only the closed piping system inside
containment which includes the main steam lines, the feedwater lines,
and the secondary side of the steam generators. The affected area of
the primary containment boundary is also part of the pressure boundary
of an ASME Class 2 component/piping system and, as such, the
replacement of the NA-2 steam generators are subject to the repair and
replacement requirements of ASME Section XI. The ASME Section XI
surface, volumetric, and system pressure test requirements are more
stringent than the Type A testing requirements of Appendix J. The
acceptance criteria for ASME Section XI system pressure testing of
welded joints is zero leakage and the test pressure for the system
pressure test will be in excess of 20 times that of a type A test. In
addition, the steam generator replacement activities do not affect the
containment structure or the containment liner. The NRC staff considers
that these inspections provide an important added level of confidence
in the continued integrity of the containment boundary. The NRC staff
also notes that the containment is maintained at a subatmospheric
pressure which provides a means for continuously monitoring potential
containment leakage paths during power operation. 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 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 NRC staff
considered denial of the proposed action.
Denial of the application would result in no change in current
environmental impacts.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for NA-2.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, the NRC staff consulted with
the Virginia 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 March 2, 1995, which is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Swem Library,
College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia 23185, and The
Alderman Library, Special Collections Department, University of
Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-2498.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of March 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David B. Matthews,
Director Project Directorate II-2, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-7695 Filed 3-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
