[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 24, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 50056-50058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-24411]


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

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 issuance of an amendment to the technical specifications 
(TSs) for Facility Operating License No. NPF-21, issued to Washington 
Public Power Supply System (the Supply System or the licensee) for 
operation of the WPPSS Nuclear Project No. 2 (WNP-2), located in Benton 
County, Washington.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment will revise the existing Technical 
Specifications (TS) in its entirety and incorporate the guidance 
provided in NUREG-1434, ``Improved BWR/6 Technical Specifications,'' 
Revision 1, April 1995. The proposed action is in accordance with the 
licensee's amendment request dated December 8, 1996, as supplemented by 
letter dated July 9, 1996.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    It has been recognized that nuclear safety in all plants would 
benefit from improvement and standardization of TS. The ``NRC Interim 
Policy Statement on Technical Specification Improvements for Nuclear 
Power Reactors,'' 52 FR 3788) contained proposed criteria for defining 
the scope of technical specifications. Later, the ``NRC Final Policy 
Statement on TS Improvement for Nuclear Power Reactors,'' (58 FR 39132) 
incorporated lessons learned since publication of the interim policy 
statement and formed the basis for recent revisions to 10 CFR 50.36. 
The ``Final Rule'' (60 FR 36953) codified criteria for determining the 
content of technical specifications. To facilitate the development of 
standard TS, each reactor vendor owners' group (OG) and the NRC staff 
developed standard TS. For WNP-2, the Standard Technical Specifications 
(STS) are NUREG-1434, ``Improved BWR/6 Technical Specifications,'' 
Revision 1. This document formed the basis for the WNP-2 Improved TS 
(ITS) conversion. The NRC Committee to Review Generic Requirements 
(CRGR) reviewed the STS, made note of its safety merits, and indicated 
its support of conversion by operating plants to the STS.

Description of the Proposed Change

    The proposed revision to the TS is based on NUREG-1434 and on 
guidance provided in the Final Policy Statement. Its objective is to 
completely rewrite, reformat, and streamline the existing TS. Emphasis 
is placed on human factors principles to improve clarity and 
understanding. The Bases section has been significantly expanded to 
clarify and better explain the purpose and foundation of each 
specification. In addition to NUREG-1434, portions of the existing TS 
were also used as the basis for the development of the WNP-2 ITS. Plant 
specific issues (unique design features, requirements, and operating 
practices) were discussed at length with the licensee and generic 
matters with General Electric Company and other OGs.
    The proposed changes from the existing TS can be grouped into four 
general categories. These groupings are characterized as relocated 
requirements, administrative changes, less restrictive changes 
involving deletion of requirements, and more restrictive changes, and 
are as follows:
    1. Relocated requirements are items which are in the existing WNP-2 
TS, but do not meet the criteria set forth in the Final Policy 
Statement. The Final Policy Statement establishes a specific set of 
objective criteria for determining which regulatory requirements and 
operating restrictions should be included in TS. Relocation of 
requirements to documents with an established control program allows 
the TS to be reserved only for those conditions or limitations upon 
reactor operation which are necessary to obviate the possibility of an 
abnormal situation or event giving rise to an immediate threat to the 
public health and safety, thereby focusing the scope of

[[Page 50057]]

the TS. In general, the proposed relocation of items from the WNP-2 TS 
to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR), appropriate plant 
specific programs, procedures and ITS Bases follows the guidance of 
NUREG-1434. Once these items have been relocated to other licensee 
controlled documents, the licensee may revise them under the provisions 
of 10 CFR 50.59 or other NRC approved control mechanisms which provide 
appropriate procedural means to control changes.
    2. Administrative changes involve the reformatting and rewording of 
requirements, consistent with the style of the General Electric STS in 
NUREG-1434, to make the TS more readily understandable to plant 
operators and other users. These changes are purely editorial in nature 
or involve the movement or reformatting of requirements without 
affecting technical content. Application of a standardized format and 
style will also help ensure consistency is achieved among 
specifications. During this reformatting and rewording process, no 
technical changes (either actual or interpretational) to the TS were 
made unless they were identified and justified.
    3. Less restrictive changes and the deletion of requirements 
involves portions of the existing specifications which provide 
information that is descriptive in nature regarding the equipment, 
systems, actions or surveillances, provide little or no safety benefit, 
and place an unnecessary burden on the licensee. This information is 
proposed to be deleted from the specifications and, in some instances, 
moved to the proposed Bases, UFSAR, or procedures. The removal of 
descriptive information to the Bases of the TS, UFSAR, or procedures is 
permissible, because the Bases, UFSAR or procedures will be controlled 
through a process which utilizes 10 CFR 50.59 and other NRC staff 
approved control mechanisms. The relaxations of requirements were the 
result of generic NRC action or other analyses. They have been 
justified on a case-by-case basis for WNP-2 as described in the safety 
evaluation to be issued with the license amendment.
    4. More restrictive requirements are proposed to be implemented in 
some areas to impose more stringent requirements than presently exist. 
These more restrictive requirements are being imposed to be consistent 
with the General Electric STS. Such changes have been made after 
ensuring the previously evaluated safety analysis was not affected. 
Also, other more restrictive technical changes have been made to 
achieve consistency, correct discrepancies, and remove ambiguities from 
the specifications. Examples of more restrictive requirements include: 
placing a Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) on plant equipment 
which is not required by the present TS to be operable; more 
restrictive requirements to restore inoperable equipment; and more 
restrictive surveillance requirements.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
revision to the TS. Changes which are administrative in nature have 
been found to have no effect on the technical content of the TS and are 
acceptable. The increased clarity and understanding these changes bring 
to the TS are expected to improve the operators' control of the plant 
in normal and accident conditions.
    Relocation of requirements to other licensee controlled documents 
does not change the requirements themselves. Future changes to these 
requirements may be made by the licensee under 10 CFR 50.59 or other 
NRC approved control mechanisms, which ensures continued maintenance of 
adequate requirements. All such relocations have been found to be in 
conformance with the guidelines of NUREG-1434 and the Final Policy 
Statement, and are, therefore, acceptable.
    Changes involving more restrictive requirements have been found to 
enhance plant safety and to be acceptable.
    Changes involving less restrictive requirements have been reviewed 
individually. When requirements have been shown to provide little or no 
safety benefit or to place unnecessary burden on the licensee, their 
removal from the TS was justified. In most cases, relaxations 
previously granted to individual plants on a plant specific basis were 
the result of a generic action, or of agreements reached during 
discussions with the OG and found to be acceptable for WNP-2. Generic 
relaxations contained in NUREG-1434 have also been reviewed by the NRC 
staff and have been found to be acceptable.
    In summary, the proposed revisions to the TS were found to provide 
control of plant operations such that reasonable assurance will be 
provided that the health and safety of the public will be adequately 
protected.
    These TS changes will not increase the probability or consequences 
of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluent 
that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in 
the allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. 
Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed TS 
amendment.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
amendment involves features located entirely within the restricted area 
as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect nonradiological plant 
effluents and have no other environmental impact. Therefore, the 
Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological 
impacts associated with the proposed amendments.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
environmental impact associated with the proposed amendments, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative to this action would be to deny 
the amendment request. Such action would not reduce the environmental 
impacts of plant operations.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of resources not previously 
considered in the Final Environmental Statement for WNP-2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on August 22, 1996, the 
Commission consulted with the Washington State official, Mr. R.R. 
Cowley of the Department of Health, State of Washington Energy Facility 
Site Evaluation Council, 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 December 8, 1995, as supplemented by letter 
dated July 9, 1996, which are available for public inspection at the 
Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C. 20555, and at the local public document

[[Page 50058]]

room located at the Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate Street, 
Richland, Washington 99352.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of September 1996.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Timothy G. Colburn,
Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor 
Projects III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 96-24411 Filed 9-23-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P