[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31171-31172]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14409]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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, located in
St. Charles Parish, Louisiana.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would change the technical specifications (TSs)
to increase the maximum enrichment for the spent fuel pool and
containment temporary storage rack from 4.1 to 4.9 weight percent U-235
when fuel assemblies contain fixed poisons.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for amendment dated January 27, 1995.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed so that the licensee can use higher
fuel enrichment to meet cycle energy requirements and to permit future
operation with longer fuel cycles.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed
revisions to the TSs. The proposed revisions would permit storage of
fuel enriched to a nominal 4.9 weight percent U-235. The safety
considerations associated with storing new and spent fuel of a higher
enrichment have been evaluated by the NRC staff. The staff has
concluded that such changes would not adversely affect plant safety.
The proposed changes have no adverse effect on the probability of any
accident. No changes are being made in the types or amounts of any
radiological effluents that may be released offsite. There is no
significant increase in the allowable individual or cumulative
occupational radiation exposure.
The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use
of higher enrichment fuel and extended irradiation (an enveloping case
for Waterford Unit 3) were published and discussed in the staff
assessment entitled, ``NRC Assessment of the Environmental Effects of
Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel Enrichment and
Irradiation,'' dated July 7, 1988, and published in the Federal
Register (53 FR 30355) on August 11, 1988, as corrected on August 24,
1988 (53 FR 32322) in connection with Shearon Harris Nuclear Power
Plant, Unit 1, Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact. As indicated therein, the environmental cost contribution of
the proposed increase in the fuel enrichment and irradiation limits are
either unchanged or may, in fact, be reduced from those summarized in
Table S-4 as set forth in 10 CFR 51.52(c). Accordingly, the Commission
concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed amendment.
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 the
Waterford Unit 3.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on May 23, 1995, the staff
consulted with the Louisiana State official, Prosanta Chowdhury of the
Louisiana Radiation Protection Division, 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 27, 1995, which is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman 2120 L
Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room
located at the University of New Orleans Library,
[[Page 31172]] Louisiana Collection, Lakefront, New Orleans, Louisiana
70122.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of June 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chandu P. Patel,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-14409 Filed 6-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
