[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 1, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-4560]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: March 1, 1994]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-366]

 

Georgia Power Co., et al., Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to the Georgia Power Company, 
acting for itself, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, Municipal Electric 
Authority of Georgia, and the City of Dalton, Georgia (the licensees), 
for the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 (Hatch or the facility), 
Facility Operating License No. NPF-5, located in Appling County, 
Georgia.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would change the Hatch Unit 2 Technical 
Specifications (TS) to increase the allowable main steam isolation 
valve (MSIV) leakage rate from 11.5 standard cubic feet per hour (scfh) 
to 100 scfh for any one MSIV and a combined maximum pathway leakage 
rate of 250 scfh for all four main steam lines, and would delete the TS 
requirements for the currently installed MSIV leakage control system 
(LCS).
    The proposed amendment is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated October 1, 1993, as revised January 6, 1994, and 
supplemented February 3, 1994.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment is needed to reduce the need for repairs of 
the MSIVs in order to meet the present, restrictive, leakage 
requirements; to resolve concerns associated with the current LCS 
performance capability at high MSIV leakage rates; and to assure a 
reliable and effective method is available for treating any potential 
MSIV leakage during a postulated loss of coolant accident (LOCA). Many 
BWRs have difficulty meeting their MSIV leakage rate limits. Extensive 
repair, rework and retesting efforts have negative effects on outage 
costs and schedules, as well as significant impact on ALARA (as low as 
reasonably achievable) radiological exposure programs for the 
licensee's staff and labor force. The alternate means proposed by the 
licensee to treat MSIV leakage makes use of components and systems that 
can reasonably be expected to remain intact and serviceable following a 
design basis LOCA. These components are the main steam lines and 
condenser.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment will not result in a significant change in 
the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that 
may be released offsite. The proposed action will not increase 
potential radiological environmental effects due to MSIV leakage beyond 
those already permitted by the regulations.
    MSIV leakage, along with containment leakage, is used to calculate 
the maximum radiological consequences of a design basis accident. 
Standard conservative assumptions were used to calculate offsite, 
control room and the technical support center (TSC) doses, including 
the doses due to MSIV leakage, which could potentially result from a 
postulated design basis LOCA at Hatch, and are described in Section 
15.1.39 of the Hatch Unit 2 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The 
control room, TSC, and offsite doses resulting from a postulated LOCA 
have recently been recalculated using currently accepted iodine dose 
conversion factors. This analysis demonstrated that a total leakage 
rate of 250 scfh results in dose exposures for the control room, TSC, 
and offsite (exclusion area boundary and low population zone) that 
remain within the requirements of 10 CFR part 100 for offsite doses and 
10 CFR part 50, appendix A, for the control room and TSC.
    Deletion of the MSIV Leakage Control System will reduce the overall 
occupational dose exposures due to the elimination of maintenance and 
surveillance activities associated with the system. The dose exposure 
associated with deleting the system will be as low as reasonably 
achievable and will be less than the dose which would result from 
maintenance and surveillance activities associated with the present 
system for the remainder of plant life.
    Therefore, radiological releases will not differ significantly from 
those determined previously, and the proposed amendment does not 
otherwise affect facility radiological effluent or occupational 
exposures. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the 
proposed action does not affect plant nonradiological effluents and has 
no other nonradiological environmental impact.
    Therefore, there will not be a significant increase in the types or 
amounts of any effluent that may be released offsite and, as such, the 
proposed amendment does not involve irreversible environmental 
consequences beyond those already associated with normal operation of 
the plant.
    Based on its review, the Commission concludes that the proposed 
amendment is acceptable. The staff has determined that the proposed 
amendment does not alter any initial conditions assumed for the design 
basis accidents previously evaluated and the alternate system is 
capable of mitigating the design basis accidents.
    The proposed amendment does not increase the probability or 
consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of 
any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant 
increase in the allowable individual or cumulative occupational 
radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that proposed 
action would result in no significant radiological environmental 
impact.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
amendment involves components in the plant which are located within the 
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR part 20. It does not affect 
nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impacts. 
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
amendment.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded that there are no significant 
environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative would be to deny the licensee's 
request for the proposed amendment. This would not reduce environmental 
impacts of plant operation.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of resources not previously 
considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to operation of 
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, dated March 1978.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The staff consulted with the State of Georgia regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    Based on the foregoing 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 amendment.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendment dated October 1, 1993, as revised January 6, 
1994, and supplemented February 3, 1994, which is available for public 
inspection in the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and the local 
public document room located at the Appling County Public Library, 301 
City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia 31513.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of February 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Loren R. Plisco,
Acting Director, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-4560 Filed 2-28-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M