[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 160 (Monday, August 19, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50454-50455]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-20146]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-458; NRC-2013-0190]
Entergy Operations, Inc., River Bend Station, Unit 1
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact;
issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2013-0190 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may access publicly-available information related to this action by the
following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2013-0190. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual(s) listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
of this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may access publicly available documents online in the NRC
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and then select ``Begin Web-
based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-
4737, or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced in this notice is provided the first time
that a document is referenced. The application for exemption dated
August 23, 2012, is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML12241A250.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), appendix J for Facility Operating License
No. NPF-47, issued to Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for
operation of the River Bend Station, Unit 1 (RBS), located in West
Feliciana Parish, Louisiana. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21,
the NRC performed an environmental assessment. Based on the results of
the environmental assessment, the NRC is issuing a finding of no
significant impact.
II. Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from certain
provisions of 10 CFR part 50, appendix J, ``Primary Reactor Containment
Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors.'' This appendix
requires that components which penetrate containment be periodically
leak tested at the ``Pa,'' defined as the ``calculated peak
containment internal pressure related to the design basis accident
specified either in the technical specification or associated bases.''
The NRC noted a conflict between Entergy's interpretation of
Pa and the literal reading of the definition of
Pa in the regulations.
For the extended power uprate, Entergy had re-performed the
containment pressure analysis and determined that the calculated peak
pressure in containment occurs in a localized area of the wetwell
within a few seconds after a postulated main steamline break. The NRC
believes that as defined in the regulations the value of Pa
should have been revised. The new calculation demonstrates that the
localized pressure in the wetwell quickly drops and equalizes
throughout the containment to a value of 3.6 pounds per square inch
gauge (psig). Entergy has stated it believes the new calculated long-
term peak containment pressure of 3.6 psig is the correct value to be
used for Pa. However, to avoid a large number of procedural
changes to reflect this new peak value, Entergy did not propose to
change the current Technical Specification (TS) value of Pa
(7.6 psig).
The exemption would allow RBS to continue to use the pre-extended
power uprate value of 7.6 psig rather than use the newly calculated
localized pressure spike value of 9.3 psig in the wetwell for
Pa. The NRC staff examined the licensee's rationale to
support the exemption request and concluded that the use the value of
7.6 psig for Pa would meet the underlying purpose of 10 CFR
part 50, appendix J. Supporting the use of this alternate value is:
(1) The time for the pressure spike to occur and fall to
equilibrium is 6 seconds, which is not sufficient time to release
source terms from the core,
(2) the pressure spike is also localized to the wetwell area which
makes up roughly 10 percent of containment,
(3) the number of containment penetrations in this area is limited.
Therefore, the current Pa value of 7.6 psig meets the intent
of 10 CFR part 50, appendix J by bounding the peak bulk containment
pressure (3.6 psig) and assuring that leakage through the primary
containment does not exceed allowable leakage rate values,
(4) the calculated peak bulk containment pressure is 3.6 psig so
the TS value of 7.6 is conservative for the use of determining
containment leakage, and
(5) this request is consistent with the determination that the NRC
staff has reached for other licensees under similar conditions based on
the same considerations.
Therefore, the Pa TS value of 7.6 psig meets the intent
of 10 CFR part 50, appendix J by bounding the peak bulk
[[Page 50455]]
containment pressure and assuring that leakage through the primary
containment does not exceed allowable leakage rate values.
The proposed exemption would allow RBS to continue to use an
alternate definition of Pa of 7.6 psig. This use of the
alternate definition for Pa meets the intent of 10 CFR part
50, appendix J because it provides testing of the primary containment
parameters at a bounding pressure that is calculated to be possible
throughout containment over a sustained period following a design basis
accident.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed exemption is needed to allow RBS to continue to use an
alternate definition for Pa which results in the use of a
lower pressure for appendix J containment testing. Use of the lower
pressure reduces the burden of modifying the test procedures, seeking
NRC authorization to change the current TS value, and conducting the
testing at the higher pressure. In addition, applying the literal
definition for Pa would not serve the underlying purpose of
the rule which is to test the primary containment parameters at a peak
pressure calculated to exist over the long term following a design
basis accident.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that the exemption described above meets the intended purpose
of the requirements in 10 CFR part 50, appendix J. The lower calculated
Pa value provides a representative bounding pressure for
evaluating the leak-tight integrity of the primary reactor containment
and related penetrations.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of
effluents that may be released offsite. There is no significant
increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. There is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure.
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water
resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no
known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with
such proposed action. Therefore, there are no significant non-
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
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
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those previously considered in the ``Final Environmental Statement,''
NUREG-1073, January 1985, for the RBS.
Agencies and Persons Notified
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 6, 2013, the staff
notified the Louisiana State official, Ji Wiley, of the Louisiana
Department of Environmental Quality, Radiation Protection Division,
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State
official had no comments.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC 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 August 23, 2012.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day of August 2013. For
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael T. Markley,
Chief, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2013-20146 Filed 8-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P