[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 77 (Tuesday, April 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19632-19633]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-10333]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-368]
Entergy Operations, Inc.; Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 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 Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), in connection
with operation of Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 2, located in Pope County,
Arkansas, under Facility Operating License No. NPF-6.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirement
to have an oil collection system for the RCP lube oil addition system,
thus allowing the licensee to utilize compensatory actions and
procedures to add lube oil to reactor coolant pumps (RCPs) in limited
quantities at power. The requirement is contained in 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix R, Section III.0, which provides that the licensee shall have
a collection system ``capable of collecting lube oil from all
pressurized and unpressurized leakage sites in the reactor coolant pump
lube oil systems.'' It also specifies that ``leakage points to be
protected shall include lift pump and piping, overflow lines, lube oil
cooler, oil fill and drain lines and plugs, flanged connections on oil
lines, and lube oil reservoirs where such features exist on the reactor
coolant pumps.''
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for an exemption dated December 23, 1997.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to reduce dose and personnel hazards
to workers who periodically add oil to the RCP lube oil system during
power operation.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and has concluded that despite not having a lube oil collection system
for the reactor coolant pump lube oil fill lines, the design of the oil
filling system and the level of protection provided by compensatory
measures during oil fill operations provide reasonable assurance that a
lube oil fire will not occur. The staff also has concluded that in the
event of a worst-case postulated fire, it would be of limited magnitude
and extent. In addition, such a fire would not cause significant damage
in the containment building and would not prevent the operators from
achieving and maintaining safe shutdown conditions.
The proposed action 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
[[Page 19633]]
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 involves features located entirely within the restricted area 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 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 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 ANO-2.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on March 14, 1997, the staff
consulted with the Arkansas State official, Mr. David Snellings,
Director of Radiation Control and Emergency Management, 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 April 11, 1996, which is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street,
NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at
the Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Tech University, Russellville, AR
72801.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of April 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Beckner,
Project Director, Project Directorate VI-1, Division of Reactor
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-10333 Filed 4-21-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
