[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 100 (Wednesday, May 25, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12730]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: May 25, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-397]

 

Washington Public Power Supply System; WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 
2 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuing an exemption from the requirements of Appendix J to 
10 CFR Part 50 in response to a Washington Public Power Supply System 
(the licensee) request for the WNP-2 nuclear plant, located in Benton 
County, Washington.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would grant an exemption from the requirement 
of Section III.D.3 of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix J for Type C testing of 
new containment purge supply and exhaust valves with metallic seats 
each refueling shutdown. It would extend the maximum interval for Type 
C testing from 24 months to 27 months for these valves. The proposed 
action is in accordance with the licensee's March 25, 1994, exemption 
request.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The licensee needs the proposed exemption because the present 
requirement forces the licensee to test the new metal-to-metal seated 
containment purge supply and exhaust valves at least every 24 months. 
Testing these valves every 27 months does not increase the risk to 
public health and safety and accommodates the unique WNP-2 refueling 
schedule.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The proposed exemption would not adversely affect primary 
containment integrity. Thus, it would not increase the potential for 
radiological releases to the environment in the event of a severe plant 
transient or hypothetical accident, including a fuel handling accident 
or design basis accident. Calculated offsite radiological doses at the 
plant exclusion boundary and low population zone outer boundary will 
continue to meet 10 CFR part 100 criteria.
    The licensee indicated that industry experience shows the new 
valves are capable of maintaining design leakage requirements over an 
extended time. The licensee also indicated that they will require the 
replacement valves to meet even tighter permissible leakage limits. 
Extending the maximum allowable interval between tests to 27 months 
allows for variations in the approximately annual operating cycle 
length due to weather. Issuing this exemption will not increase 
accident probability or result in any environmental impacts beyond 
those evaluated in the WNP-2 Final Environmental Statement. Therefore, 
the proposed changes do 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 this proposed action would 
result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
exemption does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no 
other environmental impact. Therefore, the Commission concludes that 
there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed exemption.
    The Notice of Consideration of Issuance of Amendment to Facility 
Operating License, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration 
Determination, and Opportunity for a Hearing in connection with this 
action was published in the Federal Register on March 30, 1994 (59 FR 
14901). No request for hearing or petition for leave to intervene was 
filed following this notice.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Any alternative with equal or greater environmental impact does not 
need to be evaluated since the Commission has concluded that the 
environmental effects of the proposed action are not significant.
    The principal alternative would be to deny the requested exemption. 
This would not reduce the facility's environmental impact, and would 
result in a larger expenditure of licensee resources to test 
containment purge and exhaust valves.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not use resources not previously considered in the 
Final Environmental Statement related to operation of the Washington 
Nuclear Project, Unit No. 2 dated December 1981.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The Commission's staff reviewed the licensee's request and 
consulted the Washington State official. The state official had no 
comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
    Based upon 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 exemption.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the March 25, 
1994, request for exemption which is available for public inspection at 
the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, 
DC 20555.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of May 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Theodore R. Quay,
Director, Project Directorate IV-3, Division of Reactor Projects--III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 94-12730 Filed 5-24-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M