[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 43 (Thursday, March 5, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10958-10959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-5713]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328]
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; 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 its
regulations to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-77 and DPR-79 for
the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN), Units 1 and 2, respectively, issued
to the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee).
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action is in response to the licensee's application
dated December 1, 1997, for exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR
50.71(e)(4) regarding submission of revisions to the updated Final
Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), which could also affect the schedule for
submitting design change reports for facility changes made under 10 CFR
50.59 for SQN. Under the proposed exemption the licensee would schedule
updates to the single, unified FSAR for the two units based on the
refueling cycle of Unit 2.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The Code of Federal Regulations, 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), requires
licensees to submit updates to their FSAR annually or within 6 months
after each refueling outage providing that the interval between
successive updates does not exceed 24 months. Since Units 1 and 2 share
a common FSAR, the licensee must update the same document annually or
within 6 months after a refueling outage for either unit. The
underlying purpose of the rule was to relieve licensees of the burden
of filing annual FSAR revisions while assuring that such revisions are
made at least every 24 months. The Commission reduced the burden, in
part, by permitting a licensee to submit its FSAR revisions 6 months
after refueling outages for its facility, but did not provide for
multiple unit facilities sharing a common FSAR in the rule. Rather, the
Commission stated that ``With respect to the concern about multiple
facilities sharing a common FSAR, licensees will have maximum
flexibility for scheduling updates on a case-by-case basis.'' 57 FR
39355 (1992). Allowing the exemption would maintain the UFSAR current
within 24 months of the last revision and would not exceed a 24-month
interval for submission of the 10 CFR 50.59 design-change report for
either unit, if this is submitted with the FSAR revision.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that it involves administrative activities unrelated to
plant operation.
The proposed action will not result in an increase in the
probability or consequences of accidents or result in a change in
occupational exposure or offsite dose. Therefore, there are no
radiological impacts associated with the proposed action.
The proposed action will not result in a change in nonradiological
plant effluents and will have no other nonradiological environmental
impact.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no
environmental impacts associated with this action.
Alternative 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 proposed action. Denial of the exemption would
result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental
impacts of the proposed exemption and this alternative are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources:
This action did not involve the use of any resources not previously
considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to SQN dated
February 13, 1974.
Agencies and Persons Contacted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on January 29, 1998, the
staff consulted with the Tennessee State official regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no
comments.
[[Page 10959]]
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based upon the foregoing 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 exemption.
For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's
request for the exemption dated December 1, 1997, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington DC, and at the local public
document room located at the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Library, 1001
Broad Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 24th day of February, 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frederick J. Hebdon,
Director, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-5713 Filed 3-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
