[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 98 (Wednesday, May 21, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27791-27792]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-13271]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-334]


Duquesne Light Company; Ohio Edison Company; Pennsylvania Power 
Company; Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1; 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. 
DPR-66, issued to Duquesne Light Company, et al. (the licensee), for 
operation of the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 (BVPS-1), 
located in Beaver County, Pennsylvania.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment would revise BVPS-1 Technical Specification 
(TS) 5.3.1.2 to allow storage of new reactor fuel in the new fuel 
storage racks with an enrichment not to exceed a nominal 5.0 weight 
percent Uranium-235.
    The proposed amendment is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for dated February 27, 1997.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed changes to the Facility Operating License are needed 
so that the licensee can store and use more highly enriched fuel, and 
thereby provide the flexibility of extending the fuel irradiation/
burnup to permit longer fuel cycles (i.e., longer continuous period of 
operation). Use of the proposed more highly enriched fuels would 
require the use of fewer fuel assemblies over the remaining life of the 
plant.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
revisions to the TS. The proposed revisions would permit storage of new 
fuel in the new fuel storage racks and subsequent use of fuel enriched 
with Uranium-235 (U-235) to a nominal 5.0 weight percent (5.0 weight 
percent plus a tolerance of 0.05 weight percent). The safety 
considerations associated with the storage of and subsequent reactor

[[Page 27792]]

operation with higher enriched fuel have been evaluated by the NRC 
staff. Based on its review, the NRC staff has concluded that such 
changes would not adversely affect plant safety. The proposed changes 
have no adverse affect on the probability of any accident. The higher 
enrichment, with increased fuel burnup, may slightly change the mix of 
fission products that might be released in the event of a serious 
accident, but such small changes would not significantly affect the 
consequences of serious accidents. No changes are being made in the 
types or amounts of any radiological effluents that may be released 
offsite. There is no significant increase in the allowable individual 
or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, the 
Commission concludes that the proposed action would result in no 
significant radiological environmental impact.
    The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use 
of higher enrichment fuel and extended irradiation were published and 
discussed in the staff assessment entitled ``NRC Assessment of the 
Environmental Effects of Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel 
Enrichment and Irradiation,'' dated July 7, 1988. This assessment was 
published in connection with an Environmental Assessment related to the 
Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, which was published in the 
Federal Register (53 FR 30355) on August 11, 1988, as corrected on 
August 24, 1988 (53 FR 32322). As indicated therein, the environmental 
cost contribution of an increase in the fuel enrichment of up to 5.0 
weight percent Uranium-235 and irradiation limits of up to 60,000 
gigawatt-days-per-metric-ton (GWD/MT) are either unchanged or may, in 
fact, be reduced from those summarized in Table S-4 as set forth in 10 
CFR 51.52(c). These findings are applicable to the proposed increase at 
BVPS-1 given that the proposal involves 5% and burnup of less than 
60,000 GWD/MT. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no 
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed amendment.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts of reactor 
operation with higher enrichment and extended irradiation, the proposed 
action involves 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.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded that there are no significant 
environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any 
other alternative would have equal or greater environmental impacts and 
need not be evaluated.
    The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment. 
This would not reduce environmental impact of plant operations and 
would result in reduced operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The action does not involve the use of any resources not previously 
considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Beaver Valley 
Power Station, Unit No. 1 dated July 1973.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on April 14, 1997, the staff 
consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, Mr. Michael P. Murphy 
of the Bureau of Radiation Protection, Department of Environmental 
Protection, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. 
The State official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental 
impact statement for the proposed license amendment.
    Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that 
the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality 
of the human environment.
    For further details with respect to this proposed action, see the 
application for amendment dated February 27, 1997, that 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--5- room located at the B. F. Jones Memorial Library, 
663 Franklin Avenue, Aliquippa, Pennsylvania 15001.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of May 1997.

    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. 97-13271 Filed 5-20-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P