[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 200 (Tuesday, October 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53814-53815]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-25657]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-390 and 50-391]


Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment 
and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering granting an exemption from certain requirements of its 
regulations to Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located in 
Spring City, Tennessee. Operating licenses have not been issued for 
Watts Bar; Units 1 and 2 are currently under Construction Permits CPPR-
91 and CPPR-92, respectively.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    By letter dated July 19, 1995, as supplemented by letters of July 
26 and September 6, 1995, Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) requested an 
exemption from the ingestion pathway portion of the requirement in 10 
CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section IV.F.2(a), which states that a full-
participation exercise shall be conducted within 2 years before the 
issuance of the initial operating license for full power (authorizing 
operation above 5 percent of rated power) of the first reactor and 
shall include participation by each State and local government within 
the plume exposure pathway emergency planning zone (EPZ) and each State 
within the ingestion exposure pathway EPZ. Specifically, TVA requested 
relief from the requirement to include participation of each State 
within the ingestion exposure pathway EPZ during the Watts Bar exercise 
scheduled for November 1995, because in 1992 and 1993 the State of 
Tennessee participated in full-participation exercises which included 
the ingestion pathway EPZs at Sequoyah and Watts Bar, respectively. The 
State of Tennessee supported TVA's request for an exemption because it 
would encounter financial hardship if it has to participate.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The NRC may grant exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 
50 which, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a), are (1) authorized by law, will 
not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and are 
consistent with the common defense and security, and (2) 

[[Page 53815]]
present special circumstances. Section 50.12(a)(2) of 10 CFR Part 50 
describes the special circumstances for an exemption. Special 
circumstances are present when the application of the regulation in the 
particular circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of the 
rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule 
[10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii)]. The underlying purpose of Appendix E, Section 
IV.F.2(a) is to demonstrate the integrated capabilities of appropriate 
local and State authorities and licensee personnel to adequately assess 
and respond to an accident at a commercial nuclear power plant within 2 
years before the issuance of the initial operating license for full 
power (authorizing operation above 5 percent of rated power) of the 
first reactor on a site. Special circumstances are also present when 
compliance would result in undue hardship or other costs that are 
significantly in excess of those contemplated when the regulation was 
adopted [10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(iii)]. Additionally, special circumstances 
are present when the exemption would provide only temporary relief from 
the applicable regulation and the licensee or applicant has made good 
faith efforts to comply with the regulation [10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(v)].

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The applicant's request for exemption involves aspects of the 
upcoming full-participation emergency exercise, but does not involve 
any design or construction activity. The proposed action will not 
increase the probability or consequences of accidents, makes no changes 
in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and does 
not increase 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 not involve any activity that results in release of any 
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.

Alternative 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 Commission 
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 and 
Supplement 1 related to operation of the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, dated 
December 1978 and April 1995, respectively.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, the NRC staff consulted with 
the Tennessee State official regarding the environmental impact of the 
proposed action. 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 action.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the request 
for exemption dated July 26, 1995, which is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW., 
Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the 
Chattanooga-Hamilton County Library, 1101 Broad Street, Chattanooga, 
Tennessee.

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

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Peter S. Tam,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor 
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-25657 Filed 10-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P