[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 199 (Friday, October 15, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55995-55996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-26941]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket 72-2]
Virginia Electric and Power Company; Issuance of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding the Proposed
Amendment To Revise Technical Specifications of License No. SNM-2501
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.56, to the
Special Nuclear Material License No. 2501 (SNM-2501) held by Virginia
Electric and Power Company (Virginia Power) for the Surry independent
spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI). The requested amendment would
revise the Technical Specifications of SNM-2501 to specifically permit
the storage of burnable poison rod assemblies (BPRA) and thimble plug
devices (TPD) within the TN-32 casks used at the Surry ISFSI.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
By letter dated April 5, 1999, as supplemented by letter dated
August 27, 1999, Virginia Power requested an amendment to revise the
Technical Specifications of SNM-2501 for the Surry ISFSI. The changes
to the Technical Specifications would specifically permit the storage
of BPRAs and/or TPDs within the TN-32 dry storage casks used at the
Surry ISFSI.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action will eliminate the need to physically remove
BPRAs and TPDs from irradiated fuel assemblies prior to dry cask
storage which would result in one consolidated source of radioactive
material and reduce the exposure time to plant workers during loadings.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that granting the request for amendment to specifically allow
the storage of BPRAs and TPDs within the TN-32 casks used at the Surry
ISFSI will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents.
No changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be
released off site. With regard to radiological impacts, the addition of
irradiated BPRAs and TPDs only affects the gamma source term of the
cask. In the previous shielding analysis, the calculated cask surface
dose rate from the design basis contents was increased by an expansion
factor before calculating the estimated offsite dose to allow for
future increases in fuel burnup and enrichment and possible variations
in cask design. For this amendment, the Virginia Power's calculated
increase in surface dose rate resulting from the added BPRAs and TPDs
remains within the bounds of the previous analysis with the expansion
factor and, consequently, results in no significant increase in
occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
The amendment only affects the requirements associated with the
contents of the casks and does not affect non-radiological plant
effluents or any other aspects of the environment. Therefore, there are
no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
The alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the request
for amendment (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial of the
proposed action would result in the need to physically remove BPRAs and
TPDs from each fuel assembly possessing them prior to the loading of
that assembly into dry cask storage. Physical removal of irradiated
BPRAs and TPDs would increase the exposure time and dose to the plant
workers. In addition, it would require disposal or storage of
additional radioactive material (i.e., BPRAs and TPDs) that would
otherwise be safely stored if the BPRAs and TPDs are left intact with
their irradiated fuel assembly and loaded into dry cask storage. The
environmental impacts of the alternative action are greater than the
proposed action.
Given that there are greater environmental impacts associated with
the alternative action of denying the request for amendment, the
Commission concludes that the preferred alternative is to grant this
amendment.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On September 27, 1999, Mr. Les Foldese of the Virginia Department
of Health, Bureau of Radiological Health, was contacted in regard to
the proposed action and had no concerns.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The environmental impacts of the proposed action have been reviewed
in accordance with the requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based
upon the foregoing Environmental Assessment, the Commission finds that
the proposed action of granting an amendment to permit the storage of
BPRAs and TPDs within the TN-32 casks used at the Surry ISFSI will not
significantly impact the quality of the human environment. Accordingly,
the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact
statement for the proposed amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the amendment
application
[[Page 55996]]
dated April 5, 1999, as supplemented on August 27, 1999. These
documents are available for public inspection at the Commission's
Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555 and the
Local Public Document Room at the Swem Library, the College of William
and Mary, Williamsburg, VA 23185.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of October 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
E. William Brach,
Director, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 99-26941 Filed 10-14-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-U