[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 73 (Friday, April 14, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20209-20210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-9298]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

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


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

Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an exemption from Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (10 
CFR), Section 50.44, 10 CFR 50.46, and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, for 
Facility Operating Licenses Nos. DPR-77 and DPR-79, issued to the 
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) for operation of the Sequoyah Nuclear 
Plant (SQN) Units 1 and 2, located in Hamilton County, Tennessee.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is in accordance with TVA's application for 
exemptions dated February 11, 2000.
    The proposed action is to exempt TVA from requirements to base its 
analyses of hydrogen generation, energy release and cladding oxidation, 
during design basis accidents, on the assumption that either zircaloy 
or ZIRLO is used as the fuel rod cladding material. The design of a new 
fuel planned for use at SQN utilizes M5 alloy as the fuel rod clad, 
spacer grid, fuel assembly guide, instrument tube and fuel rod end plug 
material.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed exemption is needed because the regulations indicate 
that light-water reactors contain fuel of uranium oxide pellets 
enclosed in zircaloy or ZIRLO cladding. The licensee proposes to use a 
new fuel having ``M5'' cladding instead of zircaloy or ZIRLO. 
Exemptions are, therefore, required in order to use the new fuel.
    One specific regulation that references use of zircaloy and ZIRLO 
as fuel cladding material is 10 CFR 50.46, which defines the analytical 
requirements related to the performance of Emergency Core Cooling 
Systems (ECCS). TVA has provided information that indicates that the 
effectiveness of ECCS will not be affected by the use of M5 material, 
and that the ECCS acceptance criteria specified in the regulations for 
use with zircaloy and ZIRLO are also applicable to M5. Because the 
underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.46 is achieved through the use of M5, 
special circumstances are present under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) for 
granting an exemption to 10 CFR 50.46.
    The other regulations that relate to use of zircaloy and ZIRLO are 
10 CFR 50.44 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix K, which ensure that cladding 
oxidation and hydrogen generation are limited during a loss-of-coolant 
accident and conservatively accounted for in analytical models. TVA has 
provided information indicating that the ``Baker-Just equation,'' 
referenced in these regulations for use with zircaloy and ZIRLO, are 
also conservative for use with M5. Because the underlying purpose of 10 
CFR 50.44 and 10 CFR 50, Appendix K, is achieved through the use of M5, 
special circumstances are present under 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) for 
granting an exemption to these regulations.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that with regard to radiological impacts to the general 
public, the proposed action involves features located entirely within 
the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The proposed action 
will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of 
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that 
may be

[[Page 20210]]

released off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational 
or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect non-
radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. 
Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed 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 exemption 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 dated 
February 13, 1974, for SQN Units 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, the NRC staff consulted with 
an official of the State of Tennessee, Ms. Joelle Key, on March 29, 
2000, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. Ms. 
Key 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 this action, see the licensee's 
letter dated February 11, 2000, which is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street NW., Washington, DC. Publically available 
records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Library 
component on the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov (the Electronic 
Reading Room) and from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management 
System.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of April 2000.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Ronald W. Hernan,
Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-9298 Filed 4-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P