[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 43 (Thursday, March 5, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10958-10959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-5713]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328]


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

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its 
regulations to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-77 and DPR-79 for 
the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN), Units 1 and 2, respectively, issued 
to the Tennessee Valley Authority (the licensee).

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action is in response to the licensee's application 
dated December 1, 1997, for exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 
50.71(e)(4) regarding submission of revisions to the updated Final 
Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), which could also affect the schedule for 
submitting design change reports for facility changes made under 10 CFR 
50.59 for SQN. Under the proposed exemption the licensee would schedule 
updates to the single, unified FSAR for the two units based on the 
refueling cycle of Unit 2.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The Code of Federal Regulations, 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), requires 
licensees to submit updates to their FSAR annually or within 6 months 
after each refueling outage providing that the interval between 
successive updates does not exceed 24 months. Since Units 1 and 2 share 
a common FSAR, the licensee must update the same document annually or 
within 6 months after a refueling outage for either unit. The 
underlying purpose of the rule was to relieve licensees of the burden 
of filing annual FSAR revisions while assuring that such revisions are 
made at least every 24 months. The Commission reduced the burden, in 
part, by permitting a licensee to submit its FSAR revisions 6 months 
after refueling outages for its facility, but did not provide for 
multiple unit facilities sharing a common FSAR in the rule. Rather, the 
Commission stated that ``With respect to the concern about multiple 
facilities sharing a common FSAR, licensees will have maximum 
flexibility for scheduling updates on a case-by-case basis.'' 57 FR 
39355 (1992). Allowing the exemption would maintain the UFSAR current 
within 24 months of the last revision and would not exceed a 24-month 
interval for submission of the 10 CFR 50.59 design-change report for 
either unit, if this is submitted with the FSAR revision.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that it involves administrative activities unrelated to 
plant operation.
    The proposed action will not result in an increase in the 
probability or consequences of accidents or result in a change in 
occupational exposure or offsite dose. Therefore, there are no 
radiological impacts associated with the proposed action.
    The proposed action will not result in a change in nonradiological 
plant effluents and will have no other nonradiological environmental 
impact.
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no 
environmental impacts associated with this action.

Alternative 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 impact need not be 
evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff 
considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the exemption would 
result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental 
impacts of the proposed exemption and this alternative are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources:

    This action did not involve the use of any resources not previously 
considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to SQN dated 
February 13, 1974.

Agencies and Persons Contacted:

    In accordance with its stated policy, on January 29, 1998, the 
staff consulted with the Tennessee State official regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no 
comments.

[[Page 10959]]

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 exemption.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's 
request for the exemption dated December 1, 1997, which is available 
for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington DC, and at the local public 
document room located at the Chattanooga-Hamilton County Library, 1001 
Broad Street, Chattanooga, Tennessee 37402.

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

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Frederick J. Hebdon,
Director, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-5713 Filed 3-4-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P