[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 135 (Friday, July 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36312-36313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-17296]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-298]
Nebraska Public Power District; Cooper Nuclear Station;
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering the issuance of an exemption from the requirements of
Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 to the Nebraska Public Power District (the
licensee) for the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS), located in Nemaha
County, Nebraska.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would grant an exemption from the requirements
of Section III.D.2(a) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50, to allow Type B
testing (local leak rate testing) of the drywell head and manport
primary containment penetrations to be deferred from the current due
date of July 17, 1995, until the next refueling outage, which is
scheduled to commence on October 13, 1995.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's request
for exemption dated December 27, 1994.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to avoid a plant shutdown solely for
the performance of two Type B tests of the subject penetrations. Plant
shutdown is undesirable because it subjects the reactor and its
supporting systems to transients which increase the potential for
malfunctions that may challenge safety systems. Additionally, every
shutdown and restart results in radiation exposure for plant workers a
they perform shutdown and restart related tasks in radiation areas in
various parts of the plant.
There is no overriding technical need for the Type B tests. The
tests are intended to detect local leaks and to measure leakage across
each pressure-containing or leakage-limiting boundary for certain
reactor containment penetrations, thereby providing assurance that
maximum allowable containment leakage rates are not exceeded. Section
III.D.2(a) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that Type B leak
rate tests, except for airlocks, be performed during reactor shutdown
for refueling, or at other convenient intervals, but in no case at
intervals greater than two years. The requested exemption for an
extension of the 2-year surveillance interval would allow these
penetrations to be tested at the next refueling outage, scheduled to
commence on October 13, 1995. The current 2-year interval ends on July
17, 1995, when the plan this expected to be at power. The current
operating cycle for CNS commenced on August 1, 1993, and has included
an extended, unplanned outage of nearly nine months (May 25, 1994,
through February 21, 1995). This factor, along with the anticipated
load demand and fuel capacity, has resulted in the rescheduling of the
next refueling outage to October 1995.
In its December 27, 1994, exemption request, the licensee cited
several factors to demonstrate that a high level of confidence exists
that the subject penetrations will still be capable of performing their
intended function if the required testing is deferred for a short time.
The drywell head and manport penetrations have never failed a Type B
local leak rate test in the more than 20 years the plant has been
operating; therefore, the potential for any significant degradation of
the penetrations during the few months that the tests would be deferred
is extremely low. Although the drywell head seal is made from a
silicone rubber compound and environmental conditions such as heat and
radiation have been shown to case degradation in silicone compounds,
the current operating cycle will consist of a maximum of 18 months of
power operation. Typically, the seal is expected to function for a much
longer period, as Appendix J allows up to 2 years of power operation
between tests. Finally, gross failure of the penetrations is highly
unlikely, as the drywell head and manport penetrations
[[Page 36313]]
are not active components, and therefore, are not subject to active
failure criteria.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the proposed exemption is appropriate. The exemption
would allow a one-time schedular exemption from Appendix J to 10 CFR
Part 50 to allow the Type B testing of two primary containment
penetrations to be deferred until the next refueling outage, resulting
in approximately three additional months of plant operation beyond the
date that those penetrations are currently required to be tested.
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
areas 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 that 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 requested exemption. 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
Cooper Nuclear Station, dated February 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on July 5, 1995, the staff
consulted with the Nebraska State official, Ms. Julia Schmidt, Division
of Radiological Health, Nebraska Department of Health, 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 this action, see the licensee's
request for exemption dated December 27, 1994, which is available for
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the Commission's
Local Public Document Room at the Auburn Public Library, 118 15th
Street, Auburn, Nebraska 68305.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of July 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James R. Hall, Sr.,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-17296 Filed 7-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
