[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 192 (Monday, October 5, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53473-53478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-26559]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366]


Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc; Edwin I. Hatch 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 amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. 
DPR-57 and NPF-5 issued to Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., 
for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, 
located in Appling County, Georgia.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    By letter dated August 8, 1997, as supplemented by letters dated 
March 9, May 6, July 6, July 31, September 4, and September 11, 1998, 
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC/the licensee), requested 
amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NFP-5 for the 
operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (Plant Hatch), Units 1 
and 2, located on the Altamaha River in Appling County, approximately 
11 miles north of Baxley, Georgia. On April 17, 1997, information 
concerning the SNC dose assessment for Plant Hatch was submitted in 
advance of the application for license amendments.
    SNC has requested an increase in the maximum thermal power (MWt) 
from 2558 MWt to 2763 MWt, which represents a power increase of 8 
percent. This is considered an extended power uprate because it follows 
a 5 percent power uprate from the original licensing basis of 2436 MWt 
to 2558 MWt, which was implemented following the Unit 2 fall 1995 
outage and the Unit 1 spring 1996 outage.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    SNC forecasts the increase in electrical generation to allow 
prudent planning for adding power capacity. Large base load plants are 
not required for several years. However, expected increases in customer 
demand will be met by either increasing the number of combustion 
turbines or purchasing electrical power from other sources. The 
proposed extended power uprate will provide increased reactor power, 
thus adding an additional 80 to 120 MW of reliable electrical 
generating capacity to the grid without major hardware modifications to 
the plant and will displace the need for two 50-megawatts electric gas 
turbines. Because of design and safety margins in the plant equipment, 
the proposed extended power uprate can be accomplished with relatively 
few modifications. Also, because Plant Hatch is already in operation, 
impacts of construction can be avoided. The cost of adding this nuclear 
generating capacity roughly equals the cost of constructing combustion 
turbines; however, the fuel cost of nuclear power is approximately one-
tenth that of natural gas and the additional energy is expected to be 
produced for less than 1 cent per kilowatt hour. Furthermore, unlike 
fossil fuel plants, Plant Hatch does not routinely emit sulfur dioxide, 
nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, or other atmospheric pollutants that 
contribute to greenhouse gases or acid rain.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    At the time of the issuance of the operating licenses for Plant 
Hatch, the NRC staff noted that any activity authorized by the license 
is encompassed by the overall action evaluated in the Final 
Environmental Statement (FES), which was issued in March 1978. The 
original operating licenses for both Plant Hatch units allowed a 
maximum reactor power level of 2436 MWt. Plant Hatch has already 
received a 5 percent power uprate for each unit from the original 
licensing bases of 2436 MWt to 2558 MWt, which were implemented 
following the Unit 2 fall 1995 outage and the Unit 1 spring

[[Page 53474]]

1996 outage. An Environmental Assessment associated with the power 
uprate was published in the Federal Register on July 27, 1995 (60 FR 
38593). SNC has submitted an environmental evaluation supporting the 
proposed extended power uprate action and provided a summary of its 
conclusions concerning both the radiological and nonradiological 
environmental impacts of the proposed action. Based on its independent 
analyses and the evaluation performed by the licensee, the staff 
concludes that the environmental impacts of the extended power uprate 
are well bounded or encompassed by previously evaluated environmental 
impacts and criteria established by the staff in the FES. Extended 
power uprate can be implemented at Plant Hatch without making extensive 
changes to plant systems that directly or indirectly interface with the 
environment. No changes to State permits are required. A summary of the 
nonradiological and radiological effects on the environment that may 
result from the proposed amendments is provided herein.
Nonradiological Impacts
Terrestrial Impacts
    Impacts on Land Use: The proposed extended power uprate will not 
modify the land use at the site, as described in the FES. Neither 
construction of new facilities nor the modification of existing 
facilities, including buildings, access roads, parking facilities, 
laydown areas, and onsite transmission and distribution equipment, 
including power line rights-of-way, is needed to support the uprate or 
operation after uprate. Extended power uprate will not significantly 
affect material storage, including chemicals, fuels, and other 
materials stored in aboveground and/or underground storage.
    Cooling Tower Impacts: In the FES, the staff concluded that 
operation of the Plant Hatch cooling towers would not be detrimental to 
either the land or the vegetation in the vicinity of the plant. 
Monitoring programs, including low altitude true and false color 
photography, have not revealed any negative effects attributable to 
salt deposition from cooling tower drift resulting from station 
operation to date. The proposed extended power uprate will not increase 
the circulating water flow; therefore, no increase in cooling tower 
drift is expected.
    The FES states that the climate at the site consists of mild, short 
winters (average monthly minimum temperature of approximately 52 
deg.F); therefore, icing conditions are rare and the probability of 
icing on nearby roads is extremely low. Because circulating water flow 
will not increase as a result of extended power uprate, cooling tower 
drift will not increase and the impact of icing on trees, vegetation, 
and roads will not increase. Therefore, the conclusions of the FES 
relative to icing remain valid for the proposed extended power uprate.
    A small increase in fogging potential due to operation of cooling 
towers was noted in the FES but was determined to be insignificant. The 
slight increase in heat load on the cooling towers from the proposed 
extended power uprate is expected to result in a very slight increase 
in the potential for fogging. However, this incremental increase is 
expected to be insignificant and will not change the conclusions in the 
FES.
    After considering the small increase in heat load on the cooling 
towers, the staff concludes that the incremental effects of fog 
attributable to the proposed extended power uprate will be negligible 
and will continue to be bounded by the FES. Other cooling tower 
impacts, such as drift and icing, are not expected to change as a 
result of the proposed extended power uprate.
    Transmission Facility Impacts: No changes in existing transmission 
line design and operation will result from the proposed extended power 
uprate. No new requirements or changes to onsite transmission 
equipment, operating transmission voltages, or offsite power systems 
will result from implementation of the proposed extended power uprate.
    The rise in generator output associated with extended power uprate 
will produce a slight current and electromagnetic field (EMF) increase 
in the onsite transmission line between the main generator and the 
plant substation. The line is located entirely within the fenced, 
licensee-controlled boundary of the plant, and neither members of the 
public nor wildlife would be expected to be affected. Exposure to EMFs 
from the offsite transmission system is not expected to increase 
significantly and any such slight increases are not expected to change 
the staff's conclusion in the FES that there are no significant 
biological effects attributable to EMFs from high voltage transmission 
lines associated with Plant Hatch.
    Because Plant Hatch transmission lines are designed and constructed 
in accordance with applicable shock prevention provisions of the 
National Electric Safety Code, the slight increase in current 
attributable to the proposed extended power uprate is not expected to 
change the staff's conclusions in the FES that adequate protection is 
provided against hazards from electrical shock.
    Impacts on Terrestrial Biota: The proposed extended power uprate 
will not change the land use as evaluated in the FES and will not 
disturb the habitat of any terrestrial plant or animal species. The 
conclusions reached by the staff in the FES relative to impact on 
terrestrial ecology, including endangered and threatened plant and 
animal species, remain valid for the proposed extended power uprate.
Aquatic Impacts
    Surface Water: Extended power uprate is accomplished by increasing 
the heat output of the reactor, thereby increasing steam flow to the 
turbine, for which increased feedwater flow is needed. For the proposed 
extended power uprate, the 22,500 gallons per minute (gpm) (50 cubic 
feet per second) average withdrawal rate for one unit of Plant Hatch 
assessed in the FES will remain unchanged. The increase in steam flow 
resulting from the extended power uprate does increase the duty on the 
main condenser and the resulting slight increase in evaporation from 
the cooling towers will be balanced by a decrease in blowdown discharge 
such that no increase in withdrawal is anticipated.
    Groundwater: In the FES, the staff concluded that a minimal 
quantity of groundwater (327 gpm, 0.471 million gallons per day (gpd)) 
will be withdrawn from two wells for normal two-unit operation and this 
amount was not likely to significantly impact the regional aquifer. 
Groundwater use at Plant Hatch is governed by a permit issued by the 
Environmental Protection Division of the State of Georgia Department of 
Natural Resources, which authorizes withdrawal of 1.1 million gpd 
monthly average, and 0.550 million gpd annual average. Although the 
values allowed by the groundwater withdrawal permit are somewhat 
greater than the values evaluated in the FES, the typical groundwater 
withdrawal rate for two-unit operation is 0.167 million gpd (116 gpm), 
with a maximum value of 0.281 million gpd (195 gpm). The proposed 
extended power uprate will not result in a significant increase in the 
use of groundwater resources and will not significantly reduce the 
margin to limits contained in the permit issued by the State. The 
conclusions reached by the staff in the FES relative to groundwater use 
remain valid for the proposed extended power uprate.
    Intake Impacts: The impacts of operation of the river water intakes 
include impingement of fish on the traveling screens at the intake 
structure

[[Page 53475]]

and entrainment of phytoplankton, periphyton, drifting 
macroinvertebrates, and fish eggs and larvae. The losses of impinged 
and entrained organisms were assessed in the FES and were judged to be 
insignificant, compared to overall populations in the Altamaha River. 
Due to an increase in heat load on the cooling towers as a result of 
extended power uprate, evaporative losses will increase. In order to 
compensate for the increase in evaporative losses, cooling tower makeup 
will be increased slightly and cooling tower blowdown will be decreased 
by approximately 626 gpm. The additional incremental increase in makeup 
is considered insignificant and will not significantly increase the 
impacts of impingement and entrainment on aquatic biota in the Altamaha 
River beyond those addressed in the FES.
    Discharge Impacts: Impacts of station operation resulting from the 
plant discharges include thermal and physical effects of cooling tower 
basin blowdown and the effects of chemical discharges from serial-
numbered outfalls controlled by the National Pollutant Discharge 
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The increased thermal discharges 
resulting from the proposed extended power uprate are expected to have 
the effect of increasing the discharge temperature of cooling water 
blowdown such that the temperature increase in the Altamaha River after 
mixing would be less than 0.1  deg.F.
    As described above, cooling tower blowdown is expected to decrease 
by 626 gpm; therefore, the extended power uprate will not result in 
increased impacts due to scour on aquatic macrobenthic organisms or to 
increase turbidity in the Altamaha River in the vicinity of the plant 
discharge.
    Chemical usage and subsequent discharge to the environment are not 
expected to change significantly as a result of implementing the 
proposed extended power uprate. Cycles of concentration at which the 
cooling towers operate will not change and no changes in the cooling 
tower chemistry program will result from the extended power uprate. 
Finally, no changes to the sanitary waste system or to the parameters 
regulated by the NPDES permit are needed to accomplish the extended 
power uprate. Therefore, the conclusions in the FES regarding chemical 
discharges remain valid.
Socioeconomic Impacts
    Physical Impacts: The staff has considered the potential for direct 
physical impacts resulting from the proposed extended power uprate. The 
proposed extended power uprate will be accomplished primarily by 
changes in station operation, resulting in very few modifications to 
the station facility. These limited modifications can be accomplished 
without physical changes to transmission corridors, access roads, other 
offsite facilities, or additional project-related transportation of 
goods or materials. Therefore, no significant additional construction 
disturbances causing noise, odors, vehicle exhaust, dust, vibration, or 
shock from blasting are expected and the conclusions in the FES remain 
valid.
    Social and Economic Impacts: The staff has reviewed information 
provided by the licensee regarding socioeconomic impacts. SNC is a 
major employer in the community and the largest single contributor to 
the local tax base. SNC personnel also contribute to the tax base by 
payment of sales and property tax and many are involved in volunteer 
work within the community. The proposed extended power uprate will not 
significantly affect the size of the Plant Hatch workforce and will not 
have a material effect upon the labor force required for future 
outages. Because the plant modifications needed to implement the 
extended power uprate will be minor, any increase in sales tax and 
additional revenue to local and national business will be negligible 
relative to the large tax revenues generated by Plant Hatch. It is 
expected that improving the economic performance of Plant Hatch through 
cost reductions and lower total bus bar costs per kWh will enhance the 
value of Plant Hatch as a generating asset and lower the probability of 
early plant retirement. Early plant retirement would have a significant 
negative impact upon the local economy and the community as a whole. 
The ability of the local economy to provide substitute tax revenues and 
similar employment opportunities for SNC employees is limited and 
serious reductions in public services, employment, income, business 
revenues, and property values could result from early plant retirement, 
although these reductions could be mitigated by decommissioning 
activities in the short-term.
    The staff has also evaluated the environmental impact of the 
proposed extended power uprate on aesthetic resources and lands with 
historical or archaeological significance and concludes that the 
proposed action will not change aesthetic resources or affect lands 
with historical or archeological significance.
Summary
    In summary, the proposed extended power uprate will not result in a 
significant change in nonradiological plant effluents or terrestrial or 
socioeconomic impacts and will have no other nonradiological 
environmental impact.
Radiological Impacts
Radioactive Waste Treatment
    Plant Hatch uses waste treatment systems designed to collect, 
process, and dispose of gaseous, liquid, and solid waste that might 
contain radioactive material in a safe and controlled manner such that 
discharges are in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 20 and Appendix I to Part 50. 
These radioactive waste treatment systems are discussed in the FES. The 
proposed extended power uprate will not affect the environmental 
monitoring of any of these waste streams or the radiological monitoring 
requirements contained in licensing basis documents. The proposed 
extended power uprate does not introduce any new or different 
radiological release pathways and does not increase the probability of 
an operator error or equipment malfunction that would result in an 
uncontrolled radioactive release.
Gaseous Radioactive Waste
    During normal operation, the gaseous effluent treatment systems 
process and control the release of gaseous radioactive effluents to the 
site environs, including small quantities of noble gases, halogens, 
particulates, and tritium, such that routine offsite releases from 
station operation are below the limits in 10 CFR Part 20 and Appendix I 
to Part 50 (10 CFR Part 20 includes the requirements of 40 CFR Part 
190). The gaseous waste management systems include the offgas system 
and various building ventilation systems. Assuming noble gas generation 
rates and the radioactivity contribution from halogens, particulates, 
and tritium are approximately proportional to the power increase (8 
percent), a small increase in gaseous effluents due to extended power 
uprate will occur. The staff has evaluated information provided by the 
licensee and concludes that the estimated dose values will still be 
below Appendix I requirements after the extended power uprate and the 
dose impact will be a small increase (less than 8 percent) for the 
gaseous pathway compared to the present analysis of record for the 
plant.
Liquid Radioactive Waste
    The liquid radwaste system is designed to process, and recycle to 
the extent practicable, the liquid waste collected such that annual 
radiation

[[Page 53476]]

doses to individuals from each unit resulting from routine liquid waste 
discharges are maintained below the guidelines in 10 CFR Part 20 and 10 
CFR Part 50, Appendix I. Liquid effluents are continuously monitored 
and discharges are terminated if effluents exceed preset radioactivity 
levels. Extended power uprate conditions will not result in significant 
increases in the volume of liquid from the various sources to the 
liquid radwaste system. The single largest source of liquid and wet 
solid waste is the backwash of the condensate demineralizers. With 
extended power uprate, the average time between backwash and precoat 
will be reduced slightly. The floor drain collection subsystem and the 
waste collection subsystem both receive periodic inputs from a variety 
of sources; however, neither subsystem is expected to experience a 
significant increase in the total volume of liquid radwaste due to 
operation at extended power uprate conditions.
    During normal operation, treated high-purity radwastes are normally 
routed to condensate storage for reuse. Treated floor drain wastes can 
also be routed to condensate storage, to the extent practical, 
consistent with reactor water inventory and reactor water quality 
requirements. Treated floor drain and chemical wastes are discharged 
into the cooling tower blowdown discharge pipe after being sampled to 
ensure discharge pipe concentrations after dilution are within 
applicable limits.
    The activated corrosion products in liquid wastes are expected to 
increase proportionally to extended power uprate (approximately 8 
percent). However, the total volume of processed waste is not expected 
to increase appreciably, since the only significant increase is due to 
the more frequent backwashes of the condensate demineralizers. The 
staff concludes that information submitted by the licensee shows that 
there will be no significant dose increase in the liquid pathway 
resulting from the proposed extended power uprate.
Solid Radioactive Waste
    The solid radioactive radwaste system collects, monitors, 
processes, packages, and provides temporary storage facilities for 
radioactive solid wastes prior to offsite shipment and permanent 
disposal. Plant Hatch has implemented procedures to assure that the 
processing and packaging of solid radioactive waste is accomplished in 
compliance with the Commission's regulations.
    Wet Wastes: Wet wastes, consisting primarily of spent demineralizer 
resins and filter sludges, are accumulated in phase separators and 
waste sludge tanks, which serve as storage and batching tanks for the 
wet solid radwaste system.
    The largest volume contributors to radioactive solid waste are the 
spent resin and filter sludges from the process wastes. Equipment 
wastes from operation and maintenance activities, chemical wastes, and 
reactor system wastes also contribute to solid waste generation. 
Extended power uprate conditions may involve a slight increase in the 
process wastes generated from the operation of the reactor cleanup 
filter demineralizers, fuel pool filter demineralizers, and the 
condensate filter demineralizers. More frequent reactor water cleanup 
backwashes are expected to occur under extended power uprate conditions 
due to water chemistry limits. Extended power uprate will not involve 
changes in either reactor water cleanup flow rates or filter 
performance.
    The principle effect of extended power uprate upon the condensate 
demineralizer system is increased condensate flow and, consequently, 
the condensate vessel differential pressure limit being reached more 
frequently, resulting in reduced run times. Without any modification, 
the spent resin generation from the condensate demineralizers would be 
expected to increase. However, to offset this, Plant Hatch is adopting 
the use of pleated filter elements in the demineralizer vessels. Use of 
pleated filters will double the run times to about 50 days using 
current demineralizer flow rates. Also, use of pleated filters allows 
precoating with less resin, resulting in a 50 to 60 percent reduction 
in resin usage. In conjunction with the adoption of pleated filters, 
Plant Hatch is installing an air surge system, which increases the 
energy of the backwash, enhancing the ability to flush material out of 
the filters and extending the life of demineralizer filters. These 
modifications will serve to minimize the amount of wet radwaste. The 
staff concludes that implementation of the proposed extended power 
uprate is not likely to have a significant impact on the volume or 
activity of wet radioactive solid wastes at Plant Hatch.
    Dry Wastes: Dry wastes consist of air filters, miscellaneous paper 
and rags from contaminated areas, contaminated clothing, tools and 
equipment parts that cannot be effectively decontaminated, and solid 
laboratory wastes. The activity of much of this waste is low enough to 
permit manual handling. Dry wastes are collected in containers located 
throughout the plant, compacted as practicable, and then sealed and 
removed to a controlled-access enclosed area for temporary storage. 
Because of its low activity, dry waste can be stored until enough is 
accumulated to permit economical transportation to an offsite 
processing facility or a burial ground for final disposal. The staff 
concludes that implementation of the proposed extended power uprate 
should not have a significant impact on the volume or activity of the 
dry solid radioactive wastes at Plant Hatch.
    Irradiated Reactor Components: This waste consists primarily of 
spent reactor control rod blades, fuel channels, incore ion chambers, 
and large pieces of equipment. Because of the high activation and 
contamination levels, reactor equipment waste is stored in the spent 
fuel storage pool to allow for sufficient radioactive decay before 
removal to inplant or offsite storage and final disposal in shielded 
containers or casks. Because of the mitigating effects of extended 
burnup and increased U-235 burnup, implementing the extended power 
uprate is not likely to have a significant impact on the number of 
irradiated reactor components discharged from the reactor.
Dose Consideration
    Inplant Radiation: Increasing the rated power at Plant Hatch may 
result in a potential increase in radiation sources in the reactor 
coolant system. The increased flow of reactor coolant and feedwater 
needed for the increased power level may result in changing patterns of 
erosion and corrosion in various locations in the reactor coolant 
system. This may result in the shifting of corrosion products 
throughout the reactor coolant system and a corresponding shift in dose 
rates in the vicinity of reactor coolant piping and components. In 
addition, the increased core average flux may result in an increase in 
the concentration of N-16 and activated corrosion products in the 
reactor coolant system.
    The licensee has implemented several programs in the last few years 
that will serve to counteract any potential increases in dose rates 
resulting from a power uprate. The licensee initiated a zinc injection 
program in 1990 and a cobalt reduction program in 1993. These programs, 
which are intended to reduce the level of activated corrosion products 
in the reactor coolant system and to inhibit the further buildup of 
corrosion products in reactor coolant system piping, resulted in a 
greater than 400 percent reduction in the reactor coolant cobalt-60 and 
zinc-65 concentrations

[[Page 53477]]

between 1993 and 1997. The licensee also performed chemical 
decontaminations on Unit 1 in 1991 and 1996 to reduce radiation fields 
in the reactor auxiliary systems. As a result of the chemical 
decontaminations and other initiatives described above, dose rates 
surrounding certain reactor coolant system components were reduced by 
as much as 40 percent.
    To counteract any potential increases in plant doses due to the 
increase in N-16 levels in the reactor coolant from a power uprate, the 
licensee performed plant shielding reviews of potentially affected 
plant areas. Those target areas identified were modified to maintain 
radiation levels within acceptable levels.
    Weekly surveillance data collected since 1990 indicates that the 
actual reactor water fission and corrosion product activity levels at 
Plant Hatch are approximately 5 percent of the activity levels assumed 
in the Plant Hatch original licensing basis. In addition, the average 
collective dose per reactor at Plant Hatch for the past 5 years has 
been well under the 500 person-rem value contained in the FES. The 3-
year average collective dose per reactor at Plant Hatch has been 
trending downwards since 1990. In recent years (1991-95), occupational 
doses have averaged about 0.7 person-cSv (person-rem) per megawatt-
year, which is consistent with doses at other boiling water reactors.
    On the basis of the preceding information, the staff concludes that 
the expected annual collective dose for Plant Hatch, following the 
proposed extended power uprate, will still be bounded by the dose 
estimate contained in the FES.
    Offsite Doses: The staff has reviewed SNC's offsite dose analysis 
that was provided to demonstrate that Plant Hatch can meet the offsite 
effluent release requirements of as low as reasonably achievable. The 
staff has also reviewed actual liquid and gaseous effluent release 
data, in conjunction with current dispersion/deposition data and 
periodic land/population/biota usage survey information. It is not 
likely that the doses to offsite individuals due to normal operational 
liquid effluent releases will exceed the estimated liquid effluent dose 
values currently outlined in the final safety analysis reports (FSARs) 
for Plant Hatch. The doses from airborne effluents are calculated to be 
increased from the calculated values in the FSARs by about 2.4 percent 
for the total body and 7.3 percent for the child's thyroid but the 
relevant dose criteria will be met. The staff concludes that the 
estimated doses from both the liquid and gaseous release pathways 
resulting from extended power uprate conditions are well within the 
design objectives specified in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, and the 
limits of 10 CFR Part 20.
Accident Consideration
    The staff has reviewed the licensee's analyses and has performed 
confirmatory calculations to verify the acceptability of the licensee's 
calculated doses under accident conditions. The staff concludes that 
the proposed extended power uprate will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents and will not result in a 
significant increase in the radiological environmental impact of Plant 
Hatch under accident conditions. The results of the staff's 
calculations will be presented in the safety evaluation to be issued 
with the license amendments.
Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts
    Extended power uprate is expected to involve an increase in the 
bundle average enrichment of the fuel. The environmental impacts of the 
fuel cycle and of transportation of fuel and wastes are described in 
Tables S-3 and S-4 of 10 CFR 51.51 and 10 CFR 51.52, respectively. An 
additional NRC assessment (53 FR 30355, dated August 11, 1988, as 
corrected by 53 FR 32322, dated August 24, 1988) evaluated the 
applicability of Tables S-3 and S-4 to higher burnup cycles and 
concluded that there is no significant change in environmental impact 
for fuel cycles with uranium enrichments up to 5 weight percent U-235 
and burnups less than 60 GWd/MTU from the parameters evaluated in 
Tables S-3 and S-4. Because the fuel enrichment for the extended power 
uprate will not exceed 5 weight percent U-235 and the rod average 
discharge exposure will not exceed 60 GWd/MTU, the environmental 
impacts of the proposed extended power uprate will remain bounded by 
these conclusions and are not significant.
Summary
    In summary, the proposed extended power uprate will not 
significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents, 
will not introduce any new radiological release pathways, will not 
result in a significant increase in occupational or public radiation 
exposure, and will not result in significant additional fuel cycle 
environmental impacts. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there 
are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed action.
Alternatives to Proposed Action
    Since the Commission has concluded that there is no significant 
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. However, as an alternative to the proposed action, the staff 
did consider denial of the proposed action. Denial of the proposed 
action would result in no change in the current environmental impacts 
of plant operation but would restrict operation to the currently 
licensed power level. 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 
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on September 24, 1998, the 
staff consulted with the Georgia State official, James Setser of the 
Department of Natural Resources, regarding the environmental impact of 
the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

Final Finding of No Significant Impact

    The staff has reviewed the proposed extended power uprate for Edwin 
I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, relative to the requirements set 
forth in 10 CFR Part 51. On August 27, 1998, the staff published a 
draft Environmental Assessment in the Federal Register (63 FR 45874) 
for public comment. No comments were received.
    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 August 8, 1997, as supplemented by letters 
dated March 9, May 6, July 6, July 31, September 4, and September 11, 
1998, and the information submitted by letter dated April 17, 1997, in 
advance of the licensee's application, all of which are 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 Appling County Public Library, 301 City 
Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.


[[Page 53478]]


    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of September 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. 98-26559 Filed 10-2-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P