[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 115 (Monday, June 16, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32665-32666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-15694]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328]
Tennessee Valley Authority; Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 And
2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is
considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License No.
DPR-77 and DPR-79, issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA, the
licensee), for operation of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
(SQN), located in Hamilton County, Tennessee.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed amendments would revise the SQN Technical
Specifications (TS) relating to storage of reactor fuel containing a
higher enrichment of Uranium-235 (5.0 weight-percent (w/o) vs. 4.5 w/o)
in the new fuel pit storage racks. The Commission has already
authorized use of the more highly-enriched fuel in the reactor core and
storage in the spent fuel pool in previous license amendments.
The proposed amendments are in accordance with TVA's application
dated March 13, 1997.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed changes to the Facility Operating Licenses are needed
so that the licensee can use more highly enriched fuel, and thereby
provide the flexibility of extending the fuel irradiation/burnup to
permit longer fuel cycles (i.e., longer continuous periods of
operation). Use of the proposed more highly enriched fuels would
require the use of fewer fuel assemblies over the remaining life of the
plant.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed
revisions to the TS. The proposed revision would permit use of fuel
enriched with Uranium-235 (U-235) up to 5.0 nominal w/o. The safety
considerations associated with reactor operation using higher fuel
enrichment and burnup rates have been evaluated by the NRC staff (the
staff). Based on its review, the staff concludes that the proposed
changes are acceptable and would not adversely affect plant safety. The
proposed changes have no adverse affect on the probability of any
accident. The increased burnup may slightly change the mix of fission
products that might be released in the event of a serious accident but
such small changes would not significantly affect the environmental
consequences of serious accidents. No changes are being made in the
types or amounts of any radiological effluents that may be released
offsite during normal plant operations. There is also no significant
increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational
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
changes to the TS involve components in the plant which are located
within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not
affect nonradiological plant effluents and have no other environmental
impacts. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no
significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use
of more highly enriched fuel and extended burnup rates have been
discussed in the generic 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). As indicated therein, the
environmental cost contribution of the proposed increase in 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).
Therefore, the staff concludes that there are no significant
radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with
the proposed amendment. The staff finds that the action will not result
in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact
previously evaluated in the SQN Final Environmental Statement (FES)
dated February 13, 1974, as modified by NRC's testimony to the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board, supplements to the FES, environmental
impact appraisals, or decisions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board.
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 and would
result in reduced operational flexibility. The environmental impacts of
the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action would involve no use of resources not previously
considered in the FES for SQN.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on June 10, 1997 the staff
consulted with the Tennessee State official, Eddy Nanney of the
Tennessee Division of Radiological Health, regarding the environmental
impact of the proposed action. The State official posed the question of
whether or not TVA had revisited its emergency planning procedures
because of a perceived higher source term in the core. The staff has
already reviewed the use of 5.0 w/o fuel enrichment and higher fuel
burnup prior to issuing the Sequoyah license amendments authorizing use
of 5.0 w/o enriched fuel in the reactor core. These amendments were
issued on August 1, 1990, and the supporting NRC Environmental
Assessment was published in the Federal Register on July 31, 1990 (55
FR 31112). The Environmental Assessment stated the following:
The increased burnup may slightly change the mix of fission
products that might be released in the event of a serious accident
but such small changes would not significantly affect the
environmental consequences of serious accidents. The effect of
increasing the fuel enrichment to 5.0 percent and burnups to 60,000
MWD/MTU would be to only increase the calculated thyroid dose for
the postulated fuel handling accident by about 20% and would not
exceed acceptable
[[Page 32666]]
values. There would be no effect on the estimated consequences of
other postulated design basis accidents.
The action for which this current Environmental Assessment has been
prepared only authorizes storage of new unirradiated fuel in the in the
new fuel pit storage racks. This pit is maintained dry (not flooded)
and new fuel stored therein would not be involved in any of the
accident analyses that form the design basis of the plant. Therefore,
it is not necessary to revisit emergency preparedness procedures
because of these license amendments.
The staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult with
agencies or persons other than the State of Tennessee.
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 March 13, 1997, 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 Chattanooga-Hamilton County Library, 1001
Broad Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of June 1997.
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. 97-15694 Filed 6-13-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
