[Federal Register: October 19, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 201)] [Notices] [Page 56359-56360] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr19oc99-96] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50-395] South Carolina Electric & Gas Co.; V.C. Summer Nuclear Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Sec. 50.60(a) to the South Carolina Electric & Gas Company (the licensee) for operation of the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, located in Jenkinsville, South Carolina. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would exempt the licensee from certain provisions of 10 CFR part 50, Sec. 50.60(a) and 10 CFR part 50, appendix G. The NRC has established requirements in 10 CFR part 50 to protect the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary (RCPB) in nuclear power plants. As part of these requirements, 10 CFR part 50, appendix G requires that pressure-temperature (P-T) limits be established for reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) during normal operating and hydrostatic or leak rate testing conditions. Specifically, 10 CFR part 50, appendix G states that ``[t]he appropriate requirements * * * on pressure-temperature limits and minimum permissible temperature must be met for all conditions.'' Appendix G of 10 CFR part 50 specifies that the requirements for these limits are the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code, Section XI, Appendix G limits. Pressurized water reactor licensees have installed cold overpressure mitigation systems/low temperature overpressure protection (LTOP) systems in order to protect the RCPB from being operated outside of the boundaries established by the P-T limit curves and to provide pressure relief on the RCPB during low temperature overpressurization events. The licensee is required by the V.C. Summer Technical Specifications (TS) to update and submit the changes to its LTOP setpoints whenever the licensee is requesting approval for amendments to the P-T limit curves in the V.C. Summer TS. Therefore, in order to address the provisions of amendments to the TS P-T limits and LTOP curves, the licensee requested in its submittal dated August 19, 1999, that the staff exempt V.C. Summer from application of specific requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Sec. 50.60(a) and 10 CFR part 50, appendix G, and substitute use of ASME Code Case N- 640 as an alternate reference fracture toughness for reactor vessel materials for use in determining the P-T limits. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application for exemption contained in a submittal dated August 19, 1999, and is needed to support the TS amendment that is contained in the same submittal and is [[Page 56360]] being processed separately. The proposed amendment would revise the P-T limits of TS 3.4.4 for V.C. Summer related to the heatup, cooldown, and inservice test limitations for the Reactor Coolant System to a maximum of 33 Effective Full Power Years (EFPY). It will also revise TS 3/4/ 4.9, Low Temperature Overpressure Protection System, to reflect the revised P-T limits of the reactor vessel. The Need for the Proposed Action During staff review of this submittal, the staff determined that granting of an exemption for ASME Code Case N-640 is needed to revise the method used to determine the RCS P-T limits, since continued use of the present curves unnecessarily restricts the P-T operating window. Application of the Code case will, therefore, relax the LTOP operating window and reduce potential challenges to the reactor coolant system power-operated relief valves. In the associated exemption, the staff has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), the underlying purpose of the regulation will continue to be served by the implementation of this Code case. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the exemption described above would provide an adequate margin of safety against brittle failure of the V.C. Summer reactor vessel. The proposed action will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, and 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 nonradiological environmental impacts, the proposed action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impacts. Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. 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 This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the V.C. Summer Nuclear Station, dated May 1981. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on October 15, 1999, the staff consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mr. Virgil Autry of the Division of Radioactive Waste Management, Bureau of Land and Waste Management, Department of Health and Environmental Control, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of 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 August 19, 1999, 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 local public document room located at Fairfield County Library, 300 Washington Street, Winnsboro, South Carolina. Dated at Rockville, Md., this 15th day of October 1999. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Richard L. Emch, Jr., Section Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 99-27353 Filed 10-18-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P