[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 109 (Monday, June 7, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31849-31850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-12748]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328]
Tennessee Valley Authority, Sequoyah Nuclear Plant; Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Section 68, ``Criticality Accident
Requirements,'' Subsection (b)(1) for Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-77 and DPR-79, issued to Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee),
for operation of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN), located in Hamilton
County, Tennessee. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is
issuing this environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements
of 10 CFR 50.68, ``Criticality Accident Requirements,'' Subsection
(b)(1) during the handling and storage of spent nuclear fuel in a 10
CFR Part 72 licensed spent fuel storage container that is in the SQN
spent fuel pool.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated February 20, 2004, as supplemented on May 3, 2004.
The supplemental letter provided clarifying information that did not
expand the scope of the original request.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Under 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), the Commission sets forth the following
requirement that must be met, in lieu of a monitoring system capable of
detecting criticality events.
Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any one
time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be safely
subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions feasible by
unborated water.
The licensee is on a time-critical path to load spent nuclear fuel
into a 10 CFR Part 72 licensed spent fuel storage container in June
2004. Section 50.12(a) allows licensees to apply for an exemption from
the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 if the regulation is not necessary
to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule and other conditions are
met. The licensee has stated that compliance with 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is
not necessary for handling the 10 CFR Part 72 licensed contents of the
cask system to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that the exemption described above would continue to satisfy
the underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1). The details of the
staff's safety evaluation will be provided with the letter to the
licensee approving the exemption to the regulation.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of
effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there
are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does
not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
[[Page 31850]]
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
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
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for
the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 dated February 13, 1974.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On April 28, 2004, the staff consulted with the Tennessee State
official, Elizebeth Flannagin of the Tennessee Bureau of Radiological
Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The
State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC 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 February 20, 2004, as supplemented on May 3,
2004. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's
Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on
the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who
do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff
at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to [email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of May, 2004.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William F. Burton,
Acting Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 04-12748 Filed 6-4-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P