[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 145 (Wednesday, July 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40549-40551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-20235]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-298]


Nebraska Public Power District; Cooper Nuclear Station; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the 
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-46 that 
was issued to Nebraska Public Power District (the licensee) for 
operation of the Cooper Nuclear Station (CNS), located in Nemaha 
County, Nebraska.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment will revise the existing, or current, 
Technical Specifications (CTS) for the CNS in their entirety based on 
the guidance provided in NUREG-1433, ``Standard Technical 
Specifications, General Electric Plants, BWR/4,'' Revision 1, dated 
April 1995, and in the Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on 
Technical Specifications Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors,'' 
published on July 22, 1993 (58 FR 39132). The proposed amendment is in 
accordance with the licensee's amendment request dated March 27, 1997, 
as supplemented by the letters dated September 29 and December 22, 
1997, and February 9,

[[Page 40550]]

March 13, March 26, April 16, and May 6, 1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    It has been recognized that nuclear safety in all nuclear power 
plants would benefit from an improvement and standardization of plant 
Technical Specifications (TS). The ``NRC Interim Policy Statement on 
Technical Specification Improvements for Nuclear Power Plants,''(52 FR 
3788) contained proposed criteria for defining the scope of TS. Later, 
the Commission's ``Final Policy Statement on Technical Specifications 
Improvements for Nuclear Power Reactors,'' published on July 22, 1993 
(58 FR 39132), incorporated lessons learned since publication of the 
interim policy statement and formed the basis for revisions to 10 CFR 
50.36, TS. ``The Final Rule'' (60 FR 36953) codified criteria for 
determining the content of TS. To facilitate the development of 
standard TS for nuclear power reactors, each power reactor vendor 
owners' group (OG) and the NRC staff developed standard TS. For the 
CNS, the Improved Standard Technical Specifications (ISTS) are in 
NUREG-1433. This document formed the basis for the CNS Improved 
Technical Specifications (ITS) conversion. The NRC Committee to review 
Generic Requirements (CRGR) reviewed the ISTS, made note of its safety 
merits, and indicated its support of the conversion by operating plants 
to the ISTS.

Description of the Proposed Change

    The proposed changes to the CTS are based on NUREG-1433 and on 
guidance provided by the Commission in its Final Policy Statement. The 
objective of the changes is to completely rewrite, reformat, and 
streamline the CTS (i.e., to convert the CTS to the ITS). Emphasis is 
placed on human factors principles to improve clarity and understanding 
of the TS. The Bases section of the TS has been significantly expanded 
to clarify and better explain the purpose and foundation of each 
specification. In addition to NUREG-1433, portions of the CTS were also 
used as the basis for the development of the CNS ITS. Plant-specific 
issues (e.g., unique design features, requirements, and operating 
practices) were discussed with the licensee, and generic matters with 
General Electric and other OGs.
    The proposed changes can be grouped into the following four 
categories: relocated requirements, administrative changes, less 
restrictive changes involving deletion of requirements, and more 
restrictive changes. These categories are as follows:
    1. Relocated requirements (i.e., LR or R changes) are items which 
are in the CTS, but do not meet the criteria set forth in the Final 
Policy Statement. The Final Policy Statement establishes a specific set 
of objective criteria for determining which regulatory requirements and 
operating restrictions should be included in the TS. Relocation of 
requirements to documents with an established control program, 
controlled by the regulations or the TS, allows the TS to be reserved 
only for those conditions or limitations upon reactor operation which 
are necessary to obviate the possibility of an abnormal situation or 
event giving rise to an immediate threat to the public health and 
safety, thereby focusing the scope of the TS. In general, the proposed 
relocation of items from the CTS to the Updated Safety Analysis Report 
(USAR), appropriate plant-specific programs, station procedures, or ITS 
Bases follows the guidance of NUREG-1433. Once these items have been 
relocated to other licensee-controlled documents, the licensee may 
revise them under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.59 or other NRC-approved 
control mechanisms, which provide appropriate procedural means to 
control changes by the licensee.
    2. Administrative changes (i.e., A changes) involve the 
reformatting and rewording of requirements, consistent with the style 
of the ISTS in NUREG-1433, to make the TS more readily understandable 
to station operators and other users. These changes are purely 
editorial in nature, or involve the movement or reformatting of 
requirements without affecting the technical content. Application of a 
standardized format and style will also help ensure consistency is 
achieved among specifications in the TS. During this reformatting and 
rewording process, no technical changes (either actual or 
interpretational) to the TS will be made unless they are identified and 
justified.
    3. Less restrictive changes and the deletion of requirements 
involves portions of the CTS (i.e., L changes) which (1) provide 
information that is descriptive in nature regarding the equipment, 
systems, actions, or surveillances, (2) provide little or no safety 
benefit, and (3) place an unnecessary burden on the licensee. This 
information is proposed to be deleted from the CTS and, in some 
instances, moved to the proposed Bases, USAR, or procedures. The 
removal of descriptive information to the Bases of the TS, USAR, or 
procedures is permissible because these documents will be controlled 
through a process that utilizes 10 CFR 50.59 and other NRC-approved 
control mechanisms. The relaxations of requirements were the result of 
generic NRC actions or other analyses. They will be justified on a 
case-by-case basis for the CNS and described in the safety evaluation 
to be issued with the license amendment.
    4. More restrictive requirements (i.e., M changes) are proposed to 
be implemented in some areas to impose more stringent requirements that 
are in the CTS. These more restrictive requirements are being imposed 
to be consistent with the ISTS. Such changes have been made after 
ensuring the previously evaluated safety analysis for the CNS was not 
affected. Also, other more restrictive technical changes have been made 
to achieve consistency, correct discrepancies, and remove ambiguities 
from the TS. Examples of more restrictive requirements include: placing 
a Limiting Condition for Operation (LCO) on station equipment which is 
not required by the CTS to be operable; more restrictive requirements 
to restore inoperable equipment; and more restrictive surveillance 
requirements.
    There are six other proposed changes to the CTS that may be 
included in the proposed amendment to convert the CTS to the ITS. These 
are beyond-scope changes in that they are changes to both the CTS and 
the ISTS. For the CNS, these are the following:
    1. ITS LCO 3.1.8, Scram Discharge Volume (SDV) Vent and Drain 
Valves, revise the ISTS LCO 3.1.8 Action A to require that for vent and 
drain lines with one inoperable valve, the lines be isolated within 7 
days, rather than restore the valves to operable status. (Change ITS 
3.1.8-L.4)
    2. CNS Setpoint Methodology, revise the setpoint and allowable 
values in the ITS Section 3.3 from the values in the CTS.
    3. ITS 3.3.2.1, CTS Table 3.2.C, relocate the upscale trip level 
settings (or allowable values) for the rod block monitor upscale trips 
to the core operating limits report (Change ITS 3.3.2.1-RL.2)
    4. ITS 3.3.3.2, CTS Tables 3.2.I-1 and 4.2.I, relocate the list of 
alternate shutdown instrumentation and the minimum number of channels 
for each instrument to the IST Bases (Change ITS 3.3.3.2-RL.1)
    5. ITS 3.8.3, CTS 3.9.A, 1.5.b, increase the minimum volume of fuel 
oil in the diesel generator fuel oil storage tanks. (Change ITS 3.8.3-
M.2)
    6. ITS 5.5.9, CTS 4.9.A.2.d and e, diesel fuel oil testing program, 
addition of a new ASTM-approved test as an alternative to the clear and 
bright

[[Page 40551]]

appearance test in CTS 4.9.A.2.e.1.d) (Change ITS 5.5-M.4)

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
conversion of the CTS to the ITS for the CNS, including the six beyond-
scope issues identified above. Changes which are administrative in 
nature have been found to have no effect on the technical content of 
the TS.
    The increased clarity and understanding these changes bring to the 
TS are expected to improve the operators control of the CNS in normal 
and accident conditions.
    Relocation of requirements from the CTS to other licensee-
controlled documents does not change the requirements themselves. 
Future changes to these requirements may then be made by the licensee 
under 10 CFR 50.59 and other NRC-approved control mechanisms which will 
ensure continued maintenance of adequate requirements. All such 
relocations have been found consistent with the guidelines of NUREG-
1433 and the Commission's Final Policy Statement.
    Changes involving more restrictive requirements have been found to 
enhance station safety.
    Changes involving less restrictive requirements have been reviewed 
individually. When requirements have been shown to provide little or no 
safety benefit, or to place an unnecessary burden on the licensee, 
their removal from the TS is justified. In most cases, relaxations 
previously granted to individual plants on a plant-specific basis were 
the result of a generic action, or of agreements reached during 
discussions with the OG and found to be acceptable for the station. 
Generic relaxations contained in NUREG-1433 have been reviewed by the 
NRC staff and found to be acceptable.
    In summary, the proposed revisions to the TS have been found to 
provide control of station operations such that reasonable assurance 
will be provided that the health and safety of the public will be 
adequately protected.
    The proposed amendment will not increase the probability or 
consequences of accidents, will not change the quantity or types of any 
effluent that may be released offsite, and will not significantly 
increase occupational or public doses. Also, these changes do not 
affect the design of the station, do not involve any modifications to 
the station, and do not increase the licensed power and allowable 
effluents for the station. The changes will not create any new or 
unreviewed environmental impacts that were not considered in the Final 
Environmental Statement (FES) related to the operation of the CNS dated 
February 1973. Therefore, there are no significant radiological impacts 
associated with the proposed amendment.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
amendment involves features located entirely within the restricted area 
defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect non-radiological station 
effluents and have no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are 
no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed amendment.
    Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed amendment.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded there is no significant 
environmental impact associated with the proposed amendment, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. The principal alternative to the proposed amendment would be 
to deny the amendment. Denial of the licensee's application would not 
reduce the environmental impacts of the CNS operations, but it would 
prevent the safety benefits to the station from the conversion to the 
ITS. 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 FES for the CNS.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on July 22, 1998, the staff 
consulted with the Nebraska State official, Cheryl Rogers of the State 
Department of 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 application dated March 27, 1997, as supplemented by the 
letters dated September 29 and December 22, 1997, and February 9, March 
13, March 26, April 16, and May 6, 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 Auburn Memorial Library, 1810 Courthouse 
Avenue, Auburn, Nebraska 68305.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of July 1998.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David L. Wigginton,
Acting Director, Project Directorate IV-1, Division of Reactor Projects 
III/IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 98-20235 Filed 7-28-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P