Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Proposed License Amendments To Increase Maximum Rated Thermal Power Level Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., et al.; Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366]

Draft Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant

Impact Related to Proposed License Amendments To Increase Maximum Rated

Thermal Power Level Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc., et al.;

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Commission, NRC).

ACTION: Notice of opportunity for public comment.

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

SUMMARY: The NRC has prepared a draft environmental assessment related

to a request by the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc. (SNC, the

licensee) for license amendments to increase the maximum thermal power

(MWt) at its Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, from 2558 MWt

to 2763 MWt, representing a power increase of 8 percent. This extended

power uprate follows a 5 percent power uprate from the original

licensing basis of 2436 MWt to 2558 MWt, which was implemented

following the Unit 2 fall 1995 outage and the Unit 1 spring 1996

outage. As stated in the NRC staff's position paper on the Boiling-

Water Reactor Extended Power Uprate Program dated February 8, 1996, the

staff has the option of preparing an environmental impact statement

(EIS) if

[[Page 45875]]

it believes a significant impact would result from the power uprate.

The staff did not identify a significant impact related to SNC's

request for an extended power uprate; therefore, the NRC staff is

documenting its environmental review in an environmental assessment

(EA). In accordance with the February 8, 1996, staff position paper, a

draft EA and finding of no significant impact is being published in the

Federal Register for a 30-day public comment period.

DATES: The comment period will expire 30 days after publication.

Comments received after this date will be considered if practical to do

so, but the Commission is able to assure consideration only for those

comments received on or before September 28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Submit written comments to Chief, Rules and Directives

Branch, Division of Administrative Services, Office of Administration,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop T-6-D59, Washington, DC

20555-0001. Written comments may also be delivered to Room 6-D59, Two

White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland, from 7:30

a.m. to 4:15 p.m., on Federal workdays. Copies of written comments

received may be examined at the NRC's Public Document Room, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC, or the

local public document room located at the Appling County Public

Library, 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley, Georgia.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Leonard N. Olshan, Senior Project

Manager, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mail Stop O-14 H-25,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, or by

telephone at (301) 415-1419 or by e-mail at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission is considering issuance of

amendments to Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NFP-5, issued

to SNC for the operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1

and 2, located on the Altamaha River in Appling County, approximately

11 miles north of Baxley, Georgia. The Commission's draft Environmental

Assessment And Finding of No Significant Impact related to the subject

license amendments is provided herein.

Environmental Assessment

Description of Proposed Action

By letter dated August 8, 1997, supplemented by letters dated March

9, May 6, July 6, and July 31, 1998, SNC requested amendments to

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-57 and NFP-5 for the operation of

the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (Plant Hatch), Units 1 and 2, located

on the Altamaha River in Appling County, approximately 11 miles north

of Baxley, Georgia. On April 17, 1997, information concerning the SNC

dose assessment for Plant Hatch was submitted in advance of the

application for license amendments.

SNC has requested an increase in the maximum thermal power from

2558 MWt to 2763 MWt, which represents a power increase of 8 percent.

This is considered an extended power uprate because it follows a 5

percent power uprate from the original licensing basis of 2436 MWt to

2558 MWt, which was implemented following the Unit 2 fall 1995 outage

and the Unit 1 spring 1996 outage.

Need for the Proposed Action

SNC forecasts the increase in electrical generation to allow

prudent planning for adding power capacity. Large base load plants are

not required for several years. However, expected increases in customer

demand will be met by either increasing the number of combustion

turbines or purchasing electrical power from other sources. The

proposed extended power uprate will provide increased reactor power,

thus adding an additional 80 to 120 MW of reliable electrical

generating capacity to the grid without major hardware modifications to

the plant and will displace the need for two 50-megawatts electric gas

turbines. Because of design and safety margins in the plant equipment,

the proposed extended power uprate can be accomplished with relatively

few modifications. Also, because Plant Hatch is already in operation,

impacts of construction can be avoided. The cost of adding this nuclear

generating capacity roughly equals the cost of constructing combustion

turbines; however, the fuel cost of nuclear power is approximately one-

tenth that of natural gas and the additional energy is expected to be

produced for less than 1 cent per kilowatt hour. Furthermore, unlike

fossil fuel plants, Plant Hatch does not routinely emit sulfur dioxide,

nitrogen oxides, carbon dioxide, or other atmospheric pollutants that

contribute to greenhouse gases or acid rain.

Environmental Impacts

At the time of the issuance of the operating licenses for Plant

Hatch, the NRC staff noted that any activity authorized by the license

is encompassed by the overall action evaluated in the Final

Environmental Statement (FES), which was issued in March 1978. The

original operating licenses for both Plant Hatch units allowed a

maximum reactor power level of 2436 MWt. Plant Hatch has already

received a 5 percent power uprate for each unit from the original

licensing bases of 2436 MWt to 2558 MWt, which were implemented

following the Unit 2 fall 1995 outage and the Unit 1 spring 1996

outage. An EA associated with the power uprate was published in the

Federal Register on July 27, 1995 (60 FR 38593). SNC has submitted an

environmental evaluation supporting the proposed extended power uprate

action and provided a summary of its conclusions concerning both the

radiological and nonradiological environmental impacts of the proposed

action. Based on its independent analyses and the evaluation performed

by the licensee, the staff concludes that the environmental impacts of

the extended power uprate are well bounded or encompassed by previously

evaluated environmental impacts and criteria established by the staff

in the FES. Extended power uprate can be implemented at Plant Hatch

without making extensive changes to plant systems that directly or

indirectly interface with the environment. No changes to State permits

are required. A summary of the nonradiological and radiological effects

on the environment that may result from the proposed amendments is

provided herein.

Nonradiological Impacts

Terrestrial Impacts

Impacts on Land Use: The proposed extended power uprate will not

modify the land use at the site, as described in the FES. Neither

construction of new facilities nor the modification of existing

facilities, including buildings, access roads, parking facilities,

laydown areas, and onsite transmission and distribution equipment,

including power line rights-of-way, is needed to support the uprate or

operation after uprate. Extended power uprate will not significantly

affect material storage, including chemicals, fuels, and other

materials stored in aboveground and/or underground storage.

Cooling Tower Impacts: In the FES, the staff concluded that

operation of the Plant Hatch cooling towers would not be detrimental to

either the land or the vegetation in the vicinity of the plant.

Monitoring programs, including low altitude true and false color

photography, have not revealed any negative effects attributable to

salt deposition from cooling tower drift resulting from station

operation to date. The proposed extended power uprate

[[Page 45876]]

will not increase the circulating water flow; therefore, no increase in

cooling tower drift is expected.

The FES states that the climate at the site consists of mild, short

winters (average monthly minimum temperature of approximately 52

deg.F); therefore, icing conditions are rare and the probability of

icing on nearby roads is extremely low. Because circulating water flow

will not increase as a result of extended power uprate, cooling tower

drift will not increase and the impact of icing on trees, vegetation,

and roads will not increase. Therefore, the conclusions of the FES

relative to icing remain valid for the proposed extended power uprate.

A small increase in fogging potential due to operation of cooling

towers was noted in the FES but was determined to be insignificant. The

slight increase in heat load on the cooling towers from the proposed

extended power uprate is expected to result in a very slight increase

in the potential for fogging. However, this incremental increase is

expected to be insignificant and will not change the conclusions in the

FES.

After considering the small increase in heat load on the cooling

towers, the staff concludes that the incremental effects of fog

attributable to the proposed extended power uprate will be negligible

and will continue to be bounded by the FES. Other cooling tower

impacts, such as drift and icing, are not expected to change as a

result of the proposed extended power uprate.

Transmission Facility Impacts: No changes in existing transmission

line design and operation will result from the proposed extended power

uprate. No new requirements or changes to onsite transmission

equipment, operating transmission voltages, or offsite power systems

will result from implementation of the proposed extended power uprate.

The rise in generator output associated with extended power uprate

will produce a slight current and electromagnetic field (EMF) increase

in the onsite transmission line between the main generator and the

plant substation. The line is located entirely within the fenced,

licensee-controlled boundary of the plant, and neither members of the

public nor wildlife would be expected to be affected. Exposure to EMFs

from the offsite transmission system is not expected to increase

significantly and any such slight increases are not expected to change

the staff's conclusion in the FES that there are no significant

biological effects attributable to EMFs from high voltage transmission

lines associated with Plant Hatch.

Because Plant Hatch transmission lines are designed and constructed

in accordance with applicable shock prevention provisions of the

National Electric Safety Code, the slight increase in current

attributable to the proposed extended power uprate is not expected to

change the staff's conclusions in the FES that adequate protection is

provided against hazards from electrical shock.

Impacts on Terrestrial Biota: The proposed extended power uprate

will not change the land use as evaluated in the FES and will not

disturb the habitat of any terrestrial plant or animal species. The

conclusions reached by the staff in the FES relative to impact on

terrestrial ecology, including endangered and threatened plant and

animal species, remain valid for the proposed extended power uprate.

Aquatic Impacts

Surface Water: Extended power uprate is accomplished by increasing

the heat output of the reactor, thereby increasing steam flow to the

turbine, for which increased feedwater flow is needed. For the proposed

extended power uprate, the 22,500 gallons per minute (gpm) (50 cubic

feet per second) average withdrawal rate for one unit of Plant Hatch

assessed in the FES will remain unchanged. The increase in steam flow

resulting from the extended power uprate does increase the duty on the

main condenser and the resulting slight increase in evaporation from

the cooling towers will be balanced by a decrease in blowdown discharge

such that no increase in withdrawal is anticipated.

Groundwater: In the FES, the staff concluded that a minimal

quantity of groundwater (327 gpm, 0.471 million gallons per day (gpd))

will be withdrawn from two wells for normal two-unit operation and this

amount was not likely to significantly impact the regional aquifer.

Groundwater use at Plant Hatch is governed by a permit issued by the

Environmental Protection Division of the State of Georgia Department of

Natural Resources, which authorizes withdrawal of 1.1 million gpd

monthly average, and 0.550 million gpd annual average. Although the

values allowed by the groundwater withdrawal permit are somewhat

greater than the values evaluated in the FES, the typical groundwater

withdrawal rate for two-unit operation is 0.167 million gpd (116 gpm),

with a maximum value of 0.281 million gpd (195 gpm). The proposed

extended power uprate will not result in a significant increase in the

use of groundwater resources and will not significantly reduce the

margin to limits contained in the permit issued by the State. The

conclusions reached by the staff in the FES relative to groundwater use

remain valid for the proposed extended power uprate.

Intake Impacts: The impacts of operation of the river water intakes

include impingement of fish on the traveling screens at the intake

structure and entrainment of phytoplankton, periphyton, drifting

macroinvertebrates, and fish eggs and larvae. The losses of impinged

and entrained organisms were assessed in the FES and were judged to be

insignificant, compared to overall populations in the Altamaha River.

Due to an increase in heat load on the cooling towers as a result of

extended power uprate, evaporative losses will increase. In order to

compensate for the increase in evaporative losses, cooling tower makeup

will be increased slightly and cooling tower blowdown will be decreased

by approximately 626 gpm. The additional incremental increase in makeup

is considered insignificant and will not significantly increase the

impacts of impingement and entrainment on aquatic biota in the Altamaha

River beyond those addressed in the FES.

Discharge Impacts: Impacts of station operation resulting from the

plant discharges include thermal and physical effects of cooling tower

basin blowdown and the effects of chemical discharges from serial-

numbered outfalls controlled by the National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The increased thermal discharges

resulting from the proposed extended power uprate are expected to have

the effect of increasing the discharge temperature of cooling water

blowdown such that the temperature increase in the Altamaha River after

mixing would be less than 0.1 deg.F.

As described above, cooling tower blowdown is expected to decrease

by 626 gpm; therefore, the extended power uprate will not result in

increased impacts due to scour on aquatic macrobenthic organisms or to

increase turbidity in the Altamaha River in the vicinity of the plant

discharge.

Chemical usage and subsequent discharge to the environment are not

expected to change significantly as a result of implementing the

proposed extended power uprate. Cycles of concentration at which the

cooling towers operate will not change and no changes in the cooling

tower chemistry program will result from the extended power uprate.

Finally, no changes to the sanitary waste system or to the parameters

regulated by the NPDES permit are needed to accomplish the extended

power uprate. Therefore, the conclusions in the FES regarding chemical

discharges remain valid.

[[Page 45877]]

Socioeconomic Impacts

Physical Impacts: The staff has considered the potential for direct

physical impacts resulting from the proposed extended power uprate. The

proposed extended power uprate will be accomplished primarily by

changes in station operation, resulting in very few modifications to

the station facility. These limited modifications can be accomplished

without physical changes to transmission corridors, access roads, other

offsite facilities, or additional project-related transportation of

goods or materials. Therefore, no significant additional construction

disturbances causing noise, odors, vehicle exhaust, dust, vibration, or

shock from blasting are expected and the conclusions in the FES remain

valid.

Social and Economic Impacts: The staff has reviewed information

provided by the licensee regarding socioeconomic impacts. SNC is a

major employer in the community and the largest single contributor to

the local tax base. SNC personnel also contribute to the tax base by

payment of sales and property tax and many are involved in volunteer

work within the community. The proposed extended power uprate will not

significantly affect the size of the Plant Hatch workforce and will not

have a material effect upon the labor force required for future

outages. Because the plant modifications needed to implement the

extended power uprate will be minor, any increase in sales tax and

additional revenue to local and national business will be negligible

relative to the large tax revenues generated by Plant Hatch. It is

expected that improving the economic performance of Plant Hatch through

cost reductions and lower total bus bar costs per kWh will enhance the

value of Plant Hatch as a generating asset and lower the probability of

early plant retirement. Early plant retirement would have a significant

negative impact upon the local economy and the community as a whole.

The ability of the local economy to provide substitute tax revenues and

similar employment opportunities for SNC employees is limited and

serious reductions in public services, employment, income, business

revenues, and property values could result from early plant retirement,

although these reductions could be mitigated by decommissioning

activities in the short-term.

The staff has also evaluated the environmental impact of the

proposed extended power uprate on aesthetic resources and lands with

historical or archaeological significance and concludes that the

proposed action will not change aesthetic resources or affect lands

with historical or archeological significance.

Summary

In summary, the proposed extended power uprate will not result in a

significant change in nonradiological plant effluents or terrestrial or

socioeconomic impacts and will have no other nonradiological

environmental impact.

Radiological Impacts

Radioactive Waste Treatment

Plant Hatch uses waste treatment systems designed to collect,

process, and dispose of gaseous, liquid, and solid waste that might

contain radioactive material in a safe and controlled manner such that

discharges are in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 of the

Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 20 and Appendix I to Part 50.

These radioactive waste treatment systems are discussed in the FES. The

proposed extended power uprate will not affect the environmental

monitoring of any of these waste streams or the radiological monitoring

requirements contained in licensing basis documents. The proposed

extended power uprate does not introduce any new or different

radiological release pathways and does not increase the probability of

an operator error or equipment malfunction that would result in an

uncontrolled radioactive release.

Gaseous Radioactive Waste

During normal operation, the gaseous effluent treatment systems

process and control the release of gaseous radioactive effluents to the

site environs, including small quantities of noble gases, halogens,

particulates, and tritium, such that routine offsite releases from

station operation are below the limits in 10 CFR Part 20 and Appendix I

to Part 50 (10 CFR Part 20 includes the requirements of 40 CFR Part

190). The gaseous waste management systems include the offgas system

and various building ventilation systems. Assuming noble gas generation

rates and the radioactivity contribution from halogens, particulates,

and tritium are approximately proportional to the power increase (8

percent), a small increase in gaseous effluents due to extended power

uprate will occur. The staff has evaluated information provided by the

licensee and concludes that the estimated dose values will still be

below Appendix I requirements after the extended power uprate and the

dose impact will be a small increase (less than 8 percent) for the

gaseous pathway compared to the present analysis of record for the

plant.

Liquid Radioactive Waste

The liquid radwaste system is designed to process, and recycle to

the extent practicable, the liquid waste collected such that annual

radiation doses to individuals from each unit resulting from routine

liquid waste discharges are maintained below the guidelines in 10 CFR

Part 20 and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I. Liquid effluents are

continuously monitored and discharges are terminated if effluents

exceed preset radioactivity levels. Extended power uprate conditions

will not result in significant increases in the volume of liquid from

the various sources to the liquid radwaste system. The single largest

source of liquid and wet solid waste is the backwash of the condensate

demineralizers. With extended power uprate, the average time between

backwash and precoat will be reduced slightly. The floor drain

collection subsystem and the waste collection subsystem both receive

periodic inputs from a variety of sources; however, neither subsystem

is expected to experience a significant increase in the total volume of

liquid radwaste due to operation at extended power uprate conditions.

During normal operation, treated high-purity radwastes are normally

routed to condensate storage for reuse. Treated floor drain wastes can

also be routed to condensate storage, to the extent practical,

consistent with reactor water inventory and reactor water quality

requirements. Treated floor drain and chemical wastes are discharged

into the cooling tower blowdown discharge pipe after being sampled to

ensure discharge pipe concentrations after dilution are within

applicable limits.

The activated corrosion products in liquid wastes are expected to

increase proportionally to extended power uprate (approximately 8

percent). However, the total volume of processed waste is not expected

to increase appreciably, since the only significant increase is due to

the more frequent backwashes of the condensate demineralizers. The

staff concludes that information submitted by the licensee shows that

there will be no significant dose increase in the liquid pathway

resulting from the proposed extended power uprate.

Solid Radioactive Waste

The solid radioactive radwaste system collects, monitors,

processes, packages, and provides temporary storage

[[Page 45878]]

facilities for radioactive solid wastes prior to offsite shipment and

permanent disposal. Plant Hatch has implemented procedures to assure

that the processing and packaging of solid radioactive waste is

accomplished in compliance with the Commission's regulations.

Wet Wastes: Wet wastes, consisting primarily of spent demineralizer

resins and filter sludges, are accumulated in phase separators and

waste sludge tanks, which serve as storage and batching tanks for the

wet solid radwaste system.

The largest volume contributors to radioactive solid waste are the

spent resin and filter sludges from the process wastes. Equipment

wastes from operation and maintenance activities, chemical wastes, and

reactor system wastes also contribute to solid waste generation.

Extended power uprate conditions may involve a slight increase in the

process wastes generated from the operation of the reactor cleanup

filter demineralizers, fuel pool filter demineralizers, and the

condensate filter demineralizers. More frequent reactor water cleanup

backwashes are expected to occur under extended power uprate conditions

due to water chemistry limits. Extended power uprate will not involve

changes in either reactor water cleanup flow rates or filter

performance.

The principal effect of extended power uprate upon the condensate

demineralizer system is increased condensate flow and, consequently,

the condensate vessel differential pressure limit being reached more

frequently, resulting in reduced run times. Without any modification,

the spent resin generation from the condensate demineralizers would be

expected to increase. However, to offset this, Plant Hatch is adopting

the use of pleated filter elements in the demineralizer vessels. Use of

pleated filters will double the run times to about 50 days using

current demineralizer flow rates. Also, use of pleated filters allows

precoating with less resin, resulting in a 50 to 60 percent reduction

in resin usage. In conjunction with the adoption of pleated filters,

Plant Hatch is installing an air surge system, which increases the

energy of the backwash, enhancing the ability to flush material out of

the filters and extending the life of demineralizer filters. These

modifications will serve to minimize the amount of wet radwaste. The

staff concludes that implementation of the proposed extended power

uprate is not likely to have a significant impact on the volume or

activity of wet radioactive solid wastes at Plant Hatch.

Dry Wastes: Dry wastes consist of air filters, miscellaneous paper

and rags from contaminated areas, contaminated clothing, tools and

equipment parts that cannot be effectively decontaminated, and solid

laboratory wastes. The activity of much of this waste is low enough to

permit manual handling. Dry wastes are collected in containers located

throughout the plant, compacted as practicable, and then sealed and

removed to a controlled-access enclosed area for temporary storage.

Because of its low activity, dry waste can be stored until enough is

accumulated to permit economical transportation to an offsite

processing facility or a burial ground for final disposal. The staff

concludes that implementation of the proposed extended power uprate

should not have a significant impact on the volume or activity of the

dry solid radioactive wastes at Plant Hatch.

Irradiated Reactor Components: This waste consists primarily of

spent reactor control rod blades, fuel channels, incore ion chambers,

and large pieces of equipment. Because of the high activation and

contamination levels, reactor equipment waste is stored in the spent

fuel storage pool to allow for sufficient radioactive decay before

removal to inplant or offsite storage and final disposal in shielded

containers or casks. Because of the mitigating effects of extended

burnup and increased U-235 burnup, implementing the extended power

uprate is not likely to have a significant impact on the number of

irradiated reactor components discharged from the reactor.

Dose Consideration

Inplant Radiation: Increasing the rated power at Plant Hatch may

result in a potential increase in radiation sources in the reactor

coolant system. The increased flow of reactor coolant and feedwater

needed for the increased power level may result in changing patterns of

erosion and corrosion in various locations in the reactor coolant

system. This may result in the shifting of corrosion products

throughout the reactor coolant system and a corresponding shift in dose

rates in the vicinity of reactor coolant piping and components. In

addition, the increased core average flux may result in an increase in

the concentration of N-16 and activated corrosion products in the

reactor coolant system.

The licensee has implemented several programs in the last few years

that will serve to counteract any potential increases in dose rates

resulting from a power uprate. The licensee initiated a zinc injection

program in 1990 and a cobalt reduction program in 1993. These programs,

which are intended to reduce the level of activated corrosion products

in the reactor coolant system and to inhibit the further buildup of

corrosion products in reactor coolant system piping, resulted in a

greater than 400 percent reduction in the reactor coolant cobalt-60 and

zinc-65 concentrations between 1993 and 1997. The licensee also

performed chemical decontaminations on Unit 1 in 1991 and 1996 to

reduce radiation fields in the reactor auxiliary systems. As a result

of the chemical decontaminations and other initiatives described above,

dose rates surrounding certain reactor coolant system components were

reduced by as much as 40 percent.

To counteract any potential increases in plant doses due to the

increase in N-16 levels in the reactor coolant from a power uprate, the

licensee performed plant shielding reviews of potentially affected

plant areas. Those target areas identified were modified to maintain

radiation levels within acceptable levels.

Weekly surveillance data collected since 1990 indicates that the

actual reactor water fission and corrosion product activity levels at

Plant Hatch are approximately 5 percent of the activity levels assumed

in the Plant Hatch original licensing basis. In addition, the average

collective dose per reactor at Plant Hatch for the past 5 years has

been well under the 500 person-rem value contained in the FES. The 3-

year average collective dose per reactor at Plant Hatch has been

trending downwards since 1990. In recent years (1991-95), occupational

doses have averaged about 0.7 person-cSv (person-rem) per megawatt-

year, which is consistent with doses at other boiling water reactors.

On the basis of the preceding information, the staff concludes that

the expected annual collective dose for Plant Hatch, following the

proposed extended power uprate, will still be bounded by the dose

estimate contained in the FES.

Offsite Doses: The staff has reviewed SNC's offsite dose analysis

that was provided to demonstrate that Plant Hatch can meet the offsite

effluent release requirements of as low as reasonably achievable. The

staff has also reviewed actual liquid and gaseous effluent release

data, in conjunction with current dispersion/deposition data and

periodic land/population/biota usage survey information. It is not

likely that the doses to offsite individuals due to normal operational

liquid effluent releases will exceed the estimated liquid effluent dose

values currently outlined in the final safety analysis reports

[[Page 45879]]

(FSARs) for Plant Hatch. The doses from airborne effluents are

calculated to be increased from the calculated values in the FSARs by

about 2.4 percent for the total body and 7.3 percent for the child's

thyroid but the relevant dose criteria will be met. The staff concludes

that the estimated doses from both the liquid and gaseous release

pathways resulting from extended power uprate conditions are well

within the design objectives specified in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I,

and the limits of 10 CFR Part 20.

Accident Consideration

The staff has reviewed the licensee's analyses and has performed

confirmatory calculations to verify the acceptability of the licensee's

calculated doses under accident conditions. The staff concludes that

the proposed extended power uprate will not significantly increase the

probability or consequences of accidents and will not result in a

significant increase in the radiological environmental impact of Plant

Hatch under accident conditions. The results of the staff's

calculations will be presented in the safety evaluation to be issued

with the license amendment.

Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts

Extended power uprate is expected to involve an increase in the

bundle average enrichment of the fuel. The environmental impacts of the

fuel cycle and of transportation of fuel and wastes are described in

Tables S-3 and S-4 of 10 CFR 51.51 and 10 CFR 51.52, respectively. An

additional NRC assessment (53 FR 30355, dated August 11, 1988, as

corrected by 53 FR 32322, dated August 24, 1988) evaluated the

applicability of Tables S-3 and S-4 to higher burnup cycles and

concluded that there is no significant change in environmental impact

for fuel cycles with uranium enrichments up to 5 weight percent U-235

and burnups less than 60 GWd/MTU from the parameters evaluated in

Tables S-3 and S-4. Because the fuel enrichment for the extended power

uprate will not exceed 5 weight percent U-235 and the rod average

discharge exposure will not exceed 60 GWd/MTU, the environmental

impacts of the proposed extended power uprate will remain bounded by

these conclusions and are not significant.

Summary

In summary, the proposed extended power uprate will not

significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents,

will not introduce any new radiological release pathways, will not

result in a significant increase in occupational or public radiation

exposure, and will not result in significant additional fuel cycle

environmental impacts. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there

are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with

the proposed action.

Alternatives to Proposed Action

Since the Commission has concluded that there is no significant

environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any

alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be

evaluated. However, as an alternative to the proposed action, the staff

did consider denial of the proposed action. Denial of the proposed

action would result in no change in the current environmental impacts

of plant operation but would restrict operation to the currently

licensed power level. 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 the

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.

Basis and Conclusions for Not Preparing an EIS

The staff has reviewed the proposed extended power uprate for the

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, relative to the

requirements set forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based on its environmental

assessment, the staff concludes that there are no significant

radiological or nonradiological impacts associated with the proposed

action and that the proposed license amendment would not have a

significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Therefore,

the Commission has determined, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, not to prepare

an EIS for the proposed amendment but to prepare this draft

environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.

For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the

licensee's letter dated August 8, 1997, as supplemented by letters

dated March 9, May 6, July 6, and July 31, 1998, and the information

submitted by letter dated April 17, 1997, in advance of the licensee's

application, all of 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 Appling County Public Library, 301 City Hall Drive, Baxley,

Georgia.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 21st day of August 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

David H. Jaffe,

Acting Director, Project Directorate II-2, Division of Reactor

Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98-22980 Filed 8-26-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7950-01-P