[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 128 (Tuesday, July 6, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Page 36410]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-17016]
[[Page 36410]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. STN 50-528, STN 50-529, and STN 50-530]
Arizona Public Service Company, Palo Verde Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 1, 2, and 3; 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 for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-41, NPF-51, and
NPF-74, for operation of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station
(Palo Verde, or the licensee), Units 1, 2, and 3, located in Maricopa
County, Arizona.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements
of 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4) regarding submission of revisions to the Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). Under the proposed exemption, the
licensee would submit revisions to the UFSAR, common to all three
units, to the NRC no later than 24 calendar months from the previous
revision. The licensee also requested that the exemption apply to (1)
revisions made to the quality assurance program (which has been
incorporated into the UFSAR) pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(a)(3), (2) the
safety evaluation summary reports for facility changes made under 10
CFR 50.59 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59(b)(2), and (3) the reports of
changes to the Technical Specification (TS) Bases.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for exemption dated June 9, 1998, as supplemented by letter
dated December 21, 1998.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to reduce undue regulatory burden for
units that share a common UFSAR regarding the requirements of Section
50.71(e)(4). Section 50.71(e)(4) requires licensees to submit updates
to their UFSAR annually or within 6 months after each refueling outage
provided that the interval between successive updates does not exceed
24 months. Since all three Palo Verde units share a common UFSAR, the
licensee must update the same document annually or within 6 months
after a refueling outage for each 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 in the rule for multiple unit
facilities sharing a common FSAR. Rather, the Commission stated, ``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) . Allowing the exemption would
maintain the UFSAR current within 24 months of the last revision.
Submission of the quality assurance program changes and the 10 CFR
50.59 design change report with the UFSAR revision, as permitted by 10
CFR 50.54(a)(3) and 10 CFR 50.59(b)(2), respectively, also would not
exceed a 24-month interval. In addition, submission of the TS Bases
changes made in accordance with TS 5.5.14 would not exceed a 24-month
interval.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that the proposed action is administrative in nature and
unrelated to plant operations.
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 increase in
occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect
nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impacts.
Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental
impacts associated with this action.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with this action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
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
The proposed action does not involve the use of any resources not
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement Related to
the Operation of Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and
3, dated February 1982 (NUREG-0841).
Agencies and Persons Contacted
In accordance with its stated policy, on May 13, 1999, the staff
consulted with the Arizona State official, Mr. Audbry Godwin of the
Arizona Radiation Protection Agency, regarding the environmental impact
of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of 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 June 9, 1998, as supplemented by letter dated
December 21, 1998, which are 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
Phoenix Public Library, 1221 N. Central Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85004.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 25th day of June 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mel B. Fields,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning
Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 99-17016 Filed 7-2-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P