[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 115 (Thursday, June 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31521-31522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14669]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-295 and 50-304]
Commonwealth Edison Company; Zion Nuclear Power Station, Unit
Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
[[Page 31522]] considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR-39 and DPR-48, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company
(the licensee), for operation of Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1
and 2, located in Lake County, Illinois.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would allow the storage of fuel in the new fuel
storage vault with an enrichment up to and including 4.65 weight
percent U-235, revise the description of the enrichment of the fuel in
the reactor core, and add references to three previously approved
documents in the Technical Specifications (TSs).
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed since future core designs will
incorporate fuel enrichments up to 4.65 weight percent U-235. Use of
the higher enrichment fuel will permit increased flexibility in
planning fuel cycles, with the potential for longer fuel cycles or
higher burnup rates.
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 4.65 weight 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 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 of reactor
operation with the higher enrichment fuel, the proposed changes to the
TS involve systems located entirely within the restricted area, as
defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect nonradiological plant
effluents and have 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 Zion
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on May 31, 1995, the staff
consulted with the Illinois State official, Mr. Frank Niziolek; Head,
Reactor Safety Section; Division of Engineering; Illinois Department of
Nuclear Safety; 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 and environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated December 23, 1994, 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 Waukegan Public Library, 128 N. County
Street, Waukegan, Illinois 60085.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of June 1995.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert A. Capra,
Director, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-14669 Filed 6-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
