[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 19, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11231-11232]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-6521]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50-528, 50-529, and 50-530]


Arizona Public Service Company Palo Verde Nuclear Generating 
Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3; Environmental Assessment and Finding of 
No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-41, NPF-51, and NPF-74 issued to Arizona Public Service Company, 
(the licensee), for operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating 
Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, respectively, located in Maricopa County, 
Arizona.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The Environmental Assessment is written in connection with the 
proposed core uprate for the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station in 
response to the licensee's application dated January 5, 1996. The 
proposed action would increase the rated thermal power (RTP) for Palo 
Verde from the current level of 3800 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 3876 
MWt, an increase of 2 percent over the current RTP. To support the 
increased power operation, the licensee has also proposed amendment 
changes that would lower the allowable reactor coolant system cold-leg 
temperature limits for all three PVNGS Units and lower the pressurizer 
safety valve setpoints for Units 1 and 3. The PVNGS Unit 2 safety valve 
setpoints were revised by Amendment 78, approved March 28, 1995, to the 
same values being requested for Units 1 and 3. The proposed action is 
in accordance with the licensee's application for amendment dated 
January 5, 1996.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to increase the electrical output by 
up to approximately 26 megawatts electric (MWe) and thus provide 
additional electrical power to the grids which service the commercial 
and residential areas of the owner utilities (the Salt River Project 
Agricultural Improvement and Power District, Southern California Edison 
Company, El Paso Electric Company, Public Service Company of New 
Mexico, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Southern 
California Public Power Authority).

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    A 2-percent increase in rated thermal power (RTP) is not a 
significant increase in power level. The Final Environmental Statement 
(FES) (NUREG-0841) recognized in the Summary and Conclusions Section 
that the maximum design thermal output for each unit is 4100 MWt. The 
proposed increase is less than maximum design thermal output evaluated 
during the FES construction permit stage (FES-CP). Thus the 
environmental effects previously evaluated for land and water usage are 
bounded by those previously evaluated. The increase in RTP does not 
change any of the conclusions of NUREG-0841.
    The 2-percent RTP increase does not change the method of operation 
or modify the plant configuration, apart from minor changes in 
equipment setpoints. Thus no increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident is created by the proposed amendment. 
System and programmatic reviews have been done of the nuclear steam 
supply system (NSSS) controls, the reactor coolant system, the steam 
generators, balance-of-plant systems, and the fire protection, 
equipment qualification, and probability risk assessment programs. The 
reviews concluded that operation in accordance with the changes 
proposed in this amendment was acceptable and posed no significant risk 
to the health and safety of the public. The analysis supporting this 
amendment demonstrates that the consequences of events under the 
increased-RTP conditions are within the criteria of the current 
licensing basis for the PVNGS units. Therefore the amendment, as 
proposed, does not involve a significant increase in the probability or 
consequences of an accident previously evaluated.
    The increase in RTP does not authorize construction, change the 
processes, plant equipment, or type of effluents, or significantly 
affect operation of the units. The proposed amendment will not 
significantly change the types or amount of radiological effluents from 
the facility. The changes are within the design basis of the balance-
of-plant systems, and reviews of the NSSS have demonstrated the 
acceptability of operation at the increased-RTP conditions. Safety

[[Page 11232]]
analyses of design basis events affected by the increase have been 
reviewed or reanalyzed and the consequences found to be bounded by 
current updated final safety analysis report (UFSAR) consequences or 
within regulatory requirements. In addition, no significant increases 
in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure would 
result from the proposed changes in operating conditions. Also, the 
proposed increase in the NSSS power involves no significant change in 
the amount of any nonradiological impacts associated with operation of 
the facility, i.e., those previously evaluated and approved in the FES. 
The Final Environmental Assessment evaluated the environmental impact, 
assuming the maximum design thermal output of the PVNGS units to be 
4100 MWt. Thus, the proposed increase in power level is within the 
scope of the previous reviews performed for the environmental impact of 
operation of the units. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that 
there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded that there is no measurable 
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impacts need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative to the proposed action would be to 
deny the requested amendment. Denial would not significantly reduce the 
environmental impact of plant operation and would restrict operation of 
the PVNGS units to the currently licensed power level, thereby reducing 
operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Palo 
Verde Nuclear Generating Station.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with NRC policy, on February 28, 1996, the staff 
consulted with the Arizona State official, Mr. William Wright of the 
Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency, 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 January 5, 1996, 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 Phoenix Public Library, 1221 N. Central 
Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 11th day of March 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Charles R. Thomas,
Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects 
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-6521 Filed 3-18-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P