[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 19, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11231-11232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6521]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50-528, 50-529, and 50-530]
Arizona Public Service Company Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3; 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.
NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74 issued to Arizona Public Service Company,
(the licensee), for operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively, located in Maricopa County,
Arizona.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The Environmental Assessment is written in connection with the
proposed core uprate for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in
response to the licensee's application dated January 5, 1996. The
proposed action would increase the rated thermal power (RTP) for Palo
Verde from the current level of 3800 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3876
MWt, an increase of 2 percent over the current RTP. To support the
increased power operation, the licensee has also proposed amendment
changes that would lower the allowable reactor coolant system cold-leg
temperature limits for all three PVNGS Units and lower the pressurizer
safety valve setpoints for Units 1 and 3. The PVNGS Unit 2 safety valve
setpoints were revised by Amendment 78, approved March 28, 1995, to the
same values being requested for Units 1 and 3. The proposed action is
in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated
January 5, 1996.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to increase the electrical output by
up to approximately 26 megawatts electric (MWe) and thus provide
additional electrical power to the grids which service the commercial
and residential areas of the owner utilities (the Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement and Power District, Southern California Edison
Company, El Paso Electric Company, Public Service Company of New
Mexico, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Southern
California Public Power Authority).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
A 2-percent increase in rated thermal power (RTP) is not a
significant increase in power level. The Final Environmental Statement
(FES) (NUREG-0841) recognized in the Summary and Conclusions Section
that the maximum design thermal output for each unit is 4100 MWt. The
proposed increase is less than maximum design thermal output evaluated
during the FES construction permit stage (FES-CP). Thus the
environmental effects previously evaluated for land and water usage are
bounded by those previously evaluated. The increase in RTP does not
change any of the conclusions of NUREG-0841.
The 2-percent RTP increase does not change the method of operation
or modify the plant configuration, apart from minor changes in
equipment setpoints. Thus no increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident is created by the proposed amendment.
System and programmatic reviews have been done of the nuclear steam
supply system (NSSS) controls, the reactor coolant system, the steam
generators, balance-of-plant systems, and the fire protection,
equipment qualification, and probability risk assessment programs. The
reviews concluded that operation in accordance with the changes
proposed in this amendment was acceptable and posed no significant risk
to the health and safety of the public. The analysis supporting this
amendment demonstrates that the consequences of events under the
increased-RTP conditions are within the criteria of the current
licensing basis for the PVNGS units. Therefore the amendment, as
proposed, does not involve a significant increase in the probability or
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
The increase in RTP does not authorize construction, change the
processes, plant equipment, or type of effluents, or significantly
affect operation of the units. The proposed amendment will not
significantly change the types or amount of radiological effluents from
the facility. The changes are within the design basis of the balance-
of-plant systems, and reviews of the NSSS have demonstrated the
acceptability of operation at the increased-RTP conditions. Safety
[[Page 11232]]
analyses of design basis events affected by the increase have been
reviewed or reanalyzed and the consequences found to be bounded by
current updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR) consequences or
within regulatory requirements. In addition, no significant increases
in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure would
result from the proposed changes in operating conditions. Also, the
proposed increase in the NSSS power involves no significant change in
the amount of any nonradiological impacts associated with operation of
the facility, i.e., those previously evaluated and approved in the FES.
The Final Environmental Assessment evaluated the environmental impact,
assuming the maximum design thermal output of the PVNGS units to be
4100 MWt. Thus, the proposed increase in power level is within the
scope of the previous reviews performed for the environmental impact of
operation of the units. 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 that there is no measurable
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be
evaluated. The principal alternative to the proposed action would be to
deny the requested amendment. Denial would not significantly reduce the
environmental impact of plant operation and would restrict operation of
the PVNGS units to the currently licensed power level, thereby reducing
operational flexibility.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Palo
Verde Nuclear Generating Station.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with NRC policy, on February 28, 1996, the staff
consulted with the Arizona State official, Mr. William Wright of the
Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency, 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 January 5, 1996, 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 the Phoenix Public Library, 1221 N. Central
Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of March 1996.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Charles R. Thomas,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-6521 Filed 3-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
