[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 98 (Monday, May 23, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12502]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: May 23, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-382]
Entergy Operations, Inc.
Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 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-38, issued to Entergy Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for
operation of the Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Waterford),
located in St. Charles Parish, Louisiana.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed amendment would revise 10 CFR part 20 references to
reflect the new section numbers, change administrative controls for
reporting and recordkeeping to achieve compliance with the new part 20,
and revise definitions to ensure consistency with 10 CFR part 20. The
change would revise the limitations on concentrations of radioactive
material released in liquid effluents and the limitations on the dose
rate resulting from radioactive material released in gaseous effluents.
The site boundary definition would be revised to exclude the areas over
water as part of the unrestricted area, and the high-radiation area
definition would be revised to meet the intent of the NRC draft generic
letter, ``Guidance for Modification of Technical Specifications to
Reflect (A) Revisions to 10 CFR Part 20, `Standards for Protection
Against Radiation' and 10 CFR 50.36(a), `Technical Specifications of
Effluents from Nuclear Power Reactors,' (B) Related Current Industry
Initiatives, and (C) Miscellaneous Related Editorial Clarifications,''.
These changes are in response to the licensee's application for
amendment dated February 11, 1994, implementing the new 10 CFR part 20.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed for the licensee to retain
operational flexibility, as far as is consistent with 10 CFR part 50,
appendix I, in implementing the revised 10 CFR part 20.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
With regard to the actual release rates (referenced in the
Technical Specifications (TS) as a dose rate to the maximally exposed
member of the public), the proposed revision will not increase the
types or amounts of effluents that may be released offsite, nor
increase individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposures.
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
amendment.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
changes do not affect nonradiological effluents and have no other
environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there
are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated
with the proposed amendment.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment to the TS,
any alternative to the amendment will have either no significantly
different environmental impact or will have greater environmental
impact. The principal alternative would be to deny the requested
amendment. Denying the amendment would not reduce environmental impacts
as a result of plant operation.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously
considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the
operation of Waterford, dated September 1991.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The Commission's staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not
consult other agencies or persons.
Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude 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
license amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the
application for amendment dated February 11, 1994, which is available
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L
Street NW., Washington, DC, and at the University of New Orleans
Library, Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New Orleans, Louisiana 70122.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day of May 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William D. Becker,
Director, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects--III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-12502 Filed 5-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
