[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10248-10249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-5240]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425]


Southern Nuclear Operating Company; Vogtle Electric Generating 
Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from the Final Safety Analysis 
Report (FSAR) update requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Section 
50.71(e)(4), for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-68 and NPF-81 
issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., et al. (the 
licensee) for operation of the Vogtle Nuclear Generating Plant (VEGP), 
Units 1 and 2, located in Burke County, Georgia.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would allow an exemption from the requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4) regarding submission of revisions to the VEGP, 
Units 1 and 2, FSAR. Under the proposed exemption, the licensee would 
submit FSAR updates to the single, unified FSAR for the two units that 
comprise VEGP, within 6 months following the VEGP Unit 2 refueling 
outage, not to exceed 24 months from the last submittal.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for exemption dated January 23, 1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would provide an exemption to the requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), which requires licensees to submit updates to 
their FSAR within 6 months after each refueling outage providing that 
the interval between successive updates does not exceed 24 months. 
Since VEGP, Units 1 and 2, share a common FSAR, the licensee must 
update the same document within 6 months after a refueling outage for 
either unit. Allowing the exemption would maintain the FSAR current 
within 24 months of the last revision and still would not exceed a 24-
month interval for submission of the 10 CFR 50.59 design change report 
for either unit.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that issuance of the proposed exemption to 10 CFR 
50.71(e)(4) will have no environmental impact. The change will not 
increase the probability

[[Page 10249]]

or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
any effluents that may be released offsite, 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 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.

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 
VEGP, ``Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of 
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2,'' NUREG-1087, dated 
March 1985.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on February 10, 1998, the 
staff consulted with the Georgia State official, Mr. J. Setzer, of the 
Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 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 23, 1998, 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 Burke County Library, 412 Fourth Street, 
Waynesboro, Georgia.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day of February 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Herbert N. Berkow,
Director, Project Directorate II-2, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-5240 Filed 2-27-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P