[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 84 (Tuesday, May 2, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21554-21555]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10886]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-397]


Washington Public Power Supply System, Nuclear Project No. 2; 
Notice of Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
NPF-21, issued to Washington Public Power Supply System, (the 
licensee), for operation of the Nuclear Project No. 2, located in 
Benton County, Washington.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    This Environmental Assessment is written in connection with the 
proposed core uprate for the Nuclear Project No. 2 in response to the 
licensee's application dated July 9, 1993, as supplemented by letters 
of October 9, and October 25, 1993, January 6, February 2, May 3, May 
13, September 26, and October 12, 1994. The proposed action would 
increase the rated core power level for Nuclear Project No. 2 from the 
current level of 3323 Megawatts-thermal (MWt) to 3486 MWt. The Nuclear 
Steam Supply System (NSSS) power level would be increased accordingly. 
This uprate represents an authorized thermal power level increase of 
approximately 4.9 percent. This will require resetting of the safety 
relief valve setpoints to accommodate the slight operating pressure 
increase (less than 20 psi). Operating temperature will also increase 
slightly (less than 5  deg.F). The result of these changes will be an 
approximate 5 percent increase in rated steam flow. Plant 
instrumentation will be recalibrated to reflect the uprated power. The 
licensee will implement these changes during the current refueling 
outage, which began on April 22, 1995.
    These changes will be achieved by (1) increasing the core thermal 
power to increase steam flow, (2) increasing reactor pressure to ensure 
adequate turbine control margin, (3) not increasing the current maximum 
core flow, and (4) operating the reactor along higher flow control 
lines. The increased core power will be achieved by utilizing a flatter 
radial power distribution while still maintaining limiting fuel bundles 
within their constraints.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would increase the thermal output by 163 MWt, 
which [[Page 21555]] corresponds to approximately 52 megawatts-
electrical (MWe). This would provide additional electrical power to the 
grids which service the commercial and residential areas of the 
distribution utility.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    A slight change in the environmental impact can be expected for an 
increase in plant power level, but the effects were found to be minimal 
and did not alter the findings stated in NUREG-0812, ``Final 
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Nuclear Project No. 2'' 
(FES), December 1981.
    The proposed core uprating is projected to increase the rejected 
heat by approximately 5 percent. However, the thermal discharges from 
the circulating and service water systems remain bounded by the values 
evaluated in the FES. Thus, the 5 percent increase in rejected heat has 
been evaluated and determined not to significantly impact on the 
quality of the human environment.
    The licensing basis analyses related to radiological source terms 
were originally performed assuming a core power of 3486 MWt which 
corresponds to the proposed rerate conditions. The NRC review of these 
calculations was documented in NUREG-0892, ``Safety Evaluation Report 
Related to the Operation of Nuclear Project No. 2.'' Additional 
assessments by the licensee related to the rerated conditions (power 
level and reactor coolant temperature) and other changes related to 
plant operation determined there would be no significant increase in 
the potential radioactive releases resulting from plant operation or 
design basis reactor accidents. In addition, no significant increases 
in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure would 
result from the proposed changes in operating conditions. Also, he 
proposed increase in the NSSS power involves no significant change in 
the amount of any non-radiological effluents that may be released 
offsite compared to those evaluated and approved in the FES.
    Therefore, the Commission concludes that there is no significant 
radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts associated with 
the proposed amendment.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
environmental impact 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 amendment would 
not significantly reduce the environmental impact of plant operation 
and would restrict operation of the Nuclear Project No. 2 to the 
currently licensed power level, thereby reducing operational 
flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the 
Nuclear Project No. 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    By letter of September 26, 1994, Mr. Jason J. Zeller of the Energy 
Facility Site Evaluation Council of the State of Washington informed 
the staff that 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 July 9, 1993, as supplemented by letters dated 
October 9, and October 25, 1993, January 6, January 6, February 2, May 
3, May 13, September 26, and October 12, 1994, 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 Richland Public Library, 955 Northgate 
Street, Richland, Washington 99352.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of April 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William H. Bateman,
Director, Project Directorate IV-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-10886 Filed 5-1-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M