[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35985-35986]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17488]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364]


Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.; Joseph M. Farley 
Nuclear 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 requirements of 10 CFR 
Part 50, Section 50.71(e)(4), for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-2 
and NPF-8 issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., et al. 
(the licensee) for operation of the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant 
(FNP), Units 1 and 2, located in Houston County, Alabama.

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 FNP, 
Units 1 and 2, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). Under the 
proposed exemption, the licensee would submit UFSAR updates to the 
single, unified Farley UFSAR for the two units within 6 months 
following the FNP Unit 1 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 19, 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 UFSAR within 6 months after each refueling outage providing that 
the interval between successive updates does not exceed 24 months. 
Since FNP, Units 1 and 2, share a common UFSAR, the licensee must 
update the same document within 6 months after a refueling outage for 
either unit. Allowing the exemption would maintain the UFSAR current 
within 24 months of the last revision and still would not exceed a 24-
month interval from 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) is an administrative change unrelated to plant operation.
    The proposed action will not increase the probability 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 occupational or offsite 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

[[Page 35986]]

action does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other 
nonradiological environmental impact. 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 there are no significant 
environmental impacts 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 FNP, 
``Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of Joseph M. 
Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2,'' dated December 1974 and its 
Addendum, NUREG-0727, dated September 1980.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 2, 1998, the staff 
consulted with the Alabama State official, Mr. K. Whatley of the 
Alabama Department of Public Health, 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 19, 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 Houston--Love Memorial Library, 212 W. 
Burdeshaw Street, P.O. Box 1369, Dothan, Alabama.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of June 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. 98-17488 Filed 6-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P