[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 111 (Friday, June 9, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30611-30612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14156]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412


Duquesne Light Company; et al.; Beaver Valley Power 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 an exemption from certain requirements of its 
regulations to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73, 
issued to Duquesne Light Company et al. (the licensee), for operation 
of the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, located in 
Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated February 4, 1994, for exemption from certain 
requirements of paragraph III.D.2(b)(ii) of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J. 
The proposed exemption would allow substitution of local leak rate 
testing (where the design permits)in lieu of an overall airlock leakage 
test which would otherwise be required after performing maintenance on 
the air lock. The air lock components for which this exemption would be 
applicable would be those where the design of the affected component(s) 
would permit local leak testing at a pressure of not less than Pa (the 
calculated peak containment internal pressure related to the design 
basis accident and specified either in the technical specification or 
associated bases). The use of the words ``where the design permits'' is 
intended to require that two criteria be satisfied if the proposed 
exemption is applied. The first criterion, is that any component which 
has had maintenance performed on it have local leak rate test 
provisions included into its design. The second criterion is that the 
method for measuring the component's local leak rate must be equivalent 
to or more conservative than the method which would be used on that 
component during performance of an overall air lock leakage test.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    Paragraph III.D.2.(b)(ii) of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, requires 
licensees to perform an overall air lock leak test at Pa at the end of 
periods during which the air lock has been opened when containment 
integrity was not required. Performance of an overall air lock leak 
test requires 4 to 6 hours and results in additional occupational 
radiation exposures. The time required to perform overall tests at the 
conclusion of a plant shutdown can result in delaying plant restart. 
Application of the proposed exemption would be applicable only to those 
air lock components provided with local leak rate testing capabilities 
and for which the leak rate does not exceed the leak rate that has been 
measured on that component during performance of previous acceptable 
overall air lock leakage tests. Therefore, local leak rate tests 
provide adequate assurance that the offsite doses following a design 
basis accident will be within acceptable limits.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the licensee's 
application. The proposed exemption will not increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents. The probability of accidents is not 
increased because the air locks do not affect the initiation of any 
design basis accident. The consequences of an accident are not 
increased because the component local leak rates will not be permitted 
to exceed the leak rate which would be measured on that component 
during performance of the overall air lock leakage test. No changes are 
being made in the types of any radioactive effluents that may be 
released offsite as a result of the proposed exemption, 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 effect 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, As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff 
considered denial of the proposed action. 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

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the 
Beaver Valley Power Station Units Nos. 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on May 9, 1995, the staff 
consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, Robert C. Maiers of the 
Bureau of Radiation Protection, Department of Environmental Resources, 
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State 
official had no comments. [[Page 30612]] 

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 February 4, 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 B. F. Jones Memorial Library, 663 Franklin 
Avenue, Aliquippa, Pennsylvania 15001.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day of June 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John F. Stolz,
Director, Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-14156 Filed 6-8-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M