[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 6568-6569]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-2575]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-313]


Entergy Operations, Inc.; Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 1 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from Facility Operating License 
No. DPR-51, issued to Entergy Operations, Inc., (the licensee), for 
operation of the Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 1 (ANO-1), located in 
Pope County, Arkansas.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    Section III.D.1(a) of Appendix J to 10 CFR Part 50 addresses 
requirements for periodic containment building integrated leakage rate 
tests (ILRTs). The tests measure the ability of the containment 
building to isolate the containment building atmosphere from the 
environment. The containment building is designed to prevent 
radioactive releases to the environment from the reactor and 
radioactive systems located inside the containment.

[[Page 6569]]

    Appendix J requires ILRTs to be performed at approximately equal 
intervals during each 10-year service period. The third test of each 
set must be conducted when the plant is shut down for the 10-year plant 
inservice inspections. In order to schedule the next ILRT (the third 
ILRT of this service period) such that it coincides with the 10-year 
inservice inspections, the licensee has requested a one-time exemption 
from the Appendix J requirements. The exemption would extend the 10-
year service period by one refueling outage to permit the licensee to 
perform the next ILRT together with the 10-year inservice inspection 
that are scheduled during the thirteenth refueling outage in 1996.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for exemption dated November 8, 1994.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    If performed during the thirteenth refueling outage, the third ILRT 
will not be completed until after the end of the current 10-year 
service period. To comply with regulations as written, an ILRT would be 
required during the twelfth refueling outage in 1995 to satisfy the 
requirement for three ILRT's during the 10-year service period and 
another ILRT would be required during the thirteenth refueling outage 
in 1996 to satisfy the requirement for the third ILRT to be performed 
when the plant is shut down for the 10-year inservice inspection. 
Without the requested exemption and related technical specification 
changes, the licensee would be required to perform ILRT's during both 
the twelfth and thirteenth refueling outages. A requirement to perform 
ILRT's during two consecutive refuelings is clearly beyond the intent 
of the regulations and given the satisfactory results of previous tests 
at ANO-1, there is little, if anything, to gain from two closely spaced 
tests.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that granting of the one-time relief does not impact the 
environment. Six previous ILRT's performed at approximately three year 
intervals have not identified containment leakage concerns. An interval 
extension of one refueling outage (approximately 18 months) between the 
sixth and seventh ILRT is not likely to result in unidentified 
containment leakage during plant operations. There is minimal concern 
that the ILRT interval extension would increase the release of 
radioactive materials during normal operations or after an accident.
    The change will 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 there are no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action does involve 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 action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative to the action would be to deny the 
request. Such action would not significantly reduce the environmental 
impact of plant operation and would result in lost electrical 
generation capacity and other expenses to the licensee.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the 
Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit No. 1.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, the staff consulted with the 
State of Arkansas 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 action.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated November 8, 1994, 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 Tomlinson Library, Arkansas Tech 
University, Russellville, Arkansas 72801.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of January 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
George Kalman,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-2575 Filed 2-1-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M