[Federal Register: October 15, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 199)] [Notices] [Page 55994-55995] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15oc99-123] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket 72-16] 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-2507 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. 2507 (SNM-2507) held by Virginia Electric and Power Company (Virginia Power) for the North Anna independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI). The requested amendment would revise the Technical Specifications of SNM-2507 to specifically permit the storage of burnable poison rod assemblies (BPRA) and thimble plug devices (TPD) within the TN-32 casks used at the North Anna 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-2507 for the North Anna 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 North Anna 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 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 North Anna 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 [[Page 55995]] 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 North Anna 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 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 University of Virginia Alderman Library, Charlottesville, VA 22903. 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. 99-26940 Filed 10-14-99; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590-01-P