Commonwealth Edison Company; Zion Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 115 (Thursday, June 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31521-31522]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-14669]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-295 and 50-304]


Commonwealth Edison Company; Zion Nuclear Power Station, Unit 
Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant 
Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
[[Page 31522]] considering issuance of amendments to Facility Operating 
License Nos. DPR-39 and DPR-48, issued to Commonwealth Edison Company 
(the licensee), for operation of Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 
and 2, located in Lake County, Illinois.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would allow the storage of fuel in the new fuel 
storage vault with an enrichment up to and including 4.65 weight 
percent U-235, revise the description of the enrichment of the fuel in 
the reactor core, and add references to three previously approved 
documents in the Technical Specifications (TSs).

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed since future core designs will 
incorporate fuel enrichments up to 4.65 weight percent U-235. Use of 
the higher enrichment fuel will permit increased flexibility in 
planning fuel cycles, with the potential for longer fuel cycles or 
higher burnup rates.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
revisions to the TSs. The proposed revisions would permit storage of 
fuel enriched to a nominal 4.65 weight U-235. The safety considerations 
associated with storing new and spent fuel of a higher enrichment have 
been evaluated by the NRC staff. The staff has concluded that such 
changes would not adversely affect plant safety. The proposed changes 
have no adverse effect on the probability of any accident. No changes 
are being made in the types or amounts of any radiological effluents 
that may be released offsite. There is no significant increase in the 
allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
    The environmental impacts of transportation resulting from the use 
of higher enrichment fuel and extended irradiation were published and 
discussed in the staff assessment entitled, ``NRC Assessment of the 
Environmental Effects of Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel 
Enrichment and Irradiation,'' dated July 7, 1988, and published in the 
Federal Register (53 FR 30355) on August 11, 1988, as corrected on 
August 24, 1988 (53 FR 32322) in connection with Shearon Harris Nuclear 
Power Plant, Unit 1: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact. As indicated therein, the environmental cost 
contribution of the proposed increase in the fuel enrichment and 
irradiation limits are either unchanged or may, in fact, be reduced 
from those summarized in Table S-4 as set forth in 10 CFR 51.52(c). 
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed 
amendment.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts of reactor 
operation with the higher enrichment fuel, the proposed changes to the 
TS involve systems located entirely within the restricted area, as 
defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect nonradiological plant 
effluents and have no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the 
Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

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 application 
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 for Zion 
Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on May 31, 1995, the staff 
consulted with the Illinois State official, Mr. Frank Niziolek; Head, 
Reactor Safety Section; Division of Engineering; Illinois Department of 
Nuclear Safety; 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 and environmental impact statement for the 
proposed action.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated December 23, 1994, 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 Waukegan Public Library, 128 N. County 
Street, Waukegan, Illinois 60085.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of June 1995.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert A. Capra,
Director, Project Directorate III-2, Division of Reactor Projects III/
IV, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-14669 Filed 6-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M