95-21029. Duke Power Company, et al., McGuire Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact  

  • [Federal Register Volume 60, Number 164 (Thursday, August 24, 1995)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 44087-44088]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 95-21029]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    
    [Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370]
    
    
    Duke Power Company, et al., McGuire Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1 
    and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
    
        The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
    considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
    NPF-9 and NPF-17, issued to Duke Power Company (the licensee), for 
    operation of the McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2, located in 
    Mecklenburg County, North Carolina.
    
    Environmental Assessment
    
    Identification of the Proposed Action
    
        The proposed action would change the Technical Specifications (TS) 
    to (a) allow the maximum enrichment for fuel stored in the fuel pools 
    to increase from a nominal value of 4.0 to 5.0 weight percent Uranium-
    235, (b) establish new loading patterns for new and irradiated fuel in 
    the spent fuel pool to accommodate this increase, (c) add a TS to 
    establish a limit for boron concentration for all modes of operation, 
    (d) add BASES to correspond to the TS that were added, (e) add TS to 
    reflect limits for fuel storage criticality analysis, and (f) reformat 
    the TS to bring them more in line with the standard format in the NRC 
    report NUREG-1431, ``Standard Technical Specifications Westinghouse 
    Plants.''
        The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
    application for amendment dated June 13, 1994, as supplemented by 
    letters dated August 15, 1994, March 23 and April 18, 1995.
    
    The Need for the Proposed Action
    
        The proposed action is needed so that the licensee can use higher 
    fuel enrichment to provide additional flexibility in the licensee's 
    reload design efforts and to increase the efficiency of fuel storage 
    cell use in the spent fuel pools.
    
    Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
    
        The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
    revisions to the TS. The proposed revisions would permit storage of 
    fuel enriched to a nominal 5.0 weight percent Uranium-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 
    
    [[Page 44088]]
    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). The 
    results of the Shearon Harris assessment are applicable to McGuire, 
    Units 1 and 2. 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 exemption, any 
    alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
    evaluated. The principal alternative to this action would be to deny 
    the request for exemption. Such action would not reduce the 
    environmental impacts of plant operations.
    
    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 McGuire Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2,'' dated April 1976 
    and its addendum dated January 1981.
    
    Agencies and Persons Consulted
    
        In accordance with its stated policy, on August 17, 1995, the NRC 
    staff consulted with the North Carolina State official, Mr. Dayne H. 
    Brown, Director, Department of Environmental Health and Natural 
    Resources, Division of Radiation Protection, 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 exemption.
        For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's 
    letter dated June 13, 1994, as supplemented by letters dated August 15, 
    1994, March 23 and April 18, 1995, which are 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 Atkins Library, University of North 
    Carolina, Charlotte (UNCC), North Carolina.
    
        Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of August 1995.
    
        For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
    Louis L. Wheeler,
    Acting Director, Project Directorate II-2, Division of Reactor 
    Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
    [FR Doc. 95-21029 Filed 8-23-95; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
    
    

Document Information

Published:
08/24/1995
Department:
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
95-21029
Pages:
44087-44088 (2 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370
PDF File:
95-21029.pdf