Carolina Power And Light Company, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 43462-43463 [E5-3995]

Download as PDF 43462 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 27, 2005 / Notices or petition for leave to intervene is filed within 20 days after the date of publication of this notice, the Commission or a presiding officer designated by the Commission or by the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will rule on the request and/or petition; and the Secretary or the Chief Administrative Judge of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board will issue a notice of a hearing or an appropriate order. As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a petition for leave to intervene shall set forth with particularity the interest of the petitioner in the proceeding, and how that interest may be affected by the results of the proceeding. The petition should specifically explain the reasons why intervention should be permitted with particular reference to the following general requirements: (1) The name, address and telephone number of the requestor or petitioner; (2) the nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s right under the Act to be made a party to the proceeding; (3) the nature and extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s property, financial, or other interest in the proceeding; and (4) the possible effect of any decision or order which may be entered in the proceeding on the requestors/petitioner’s interest. The petition must also identify the specific contentions which the petitioner/ requestor seeks to have litigated at the proceeding. Each contention must consist of a specific statement of the issue of law or fact to be raised or controverted. In addition, the petitioner/ requestor shall provide a brief explanation of the bases for the contention and a concise statement of the alleged facts or expert opinion which support the contention and on which the petitioner/ requestor intends to rely in proving the contention at the hearing. The petitioner/requestor must also provide references to those specific sources and documents of which the petitioner/requestor is aware and on which the petitioner intends to rely to establish those facts or expert opinion. The petition must include sufficient information to show that a genuine dispute exists with the applicant on a material issue of law or fact. Contentions shall be limited to matters within the scope of the amendment under consideration. The contention must be one which, if proven, would entitle the petitioner/requestor to relief. A petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy these requirements with respect to at least one contention will not be permitted to participate as a party. Those permitted to intervene become parties to the proceeding, subject to any VerDate jul<14>2003 19:40 Jul 26, 2005 Jkt 205001 limitations in the order granting leave to intervene, and have the opportunity to participate fully in the conduct of the hearing. Non-timely requests and/or petitions and contentions will not be entertained absent a determination by the Commission or the presiding officer of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board that the petition, request and/or the contentions should be granted based on a balancing of the factors specified in 10 CFR 2.309(a)(1)(I)-(viii). A request for a hearing or a petition for leave to intervene must be filed by: (1) First class mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express mail, and expedited delivery services: Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; (3) e-mail addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, hearingdocket@nrc.gov; or (4) facsimile transmission addressed to the Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101, verification number is (301) 415–1966. A copy of the request for hearing and petition for leave to intervene should also be sent to the Office of the General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 0001, and it is requested that copies be transmitted either by means of facsimile transmission to (301) 415–3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. Requests for a hearing and petitions for leave to intervene should be served upon Douglas L. Anderson and Jon A. Andreasen of MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company, 666 Grand Avenue, Des Moines, Iowa 50303; M. Douglas Dunn, Steven M Kramer, and Carla J. Urquhart of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy L.L.P., 1 Chase Manhatten Plaza, New York, New York, 10005, ph.: (212) 530–5000; Jeffery B. Erb of PacifiCorp, Suite 1900, 825 N.E. Multnomah, Portland, Oregon, 92732; and Sam Behrends IV and Robert M. Andersen of LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, L.L.P., 1875 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 1200, Washington, DC 20009–5728, ph.: (202) 986–8000, facsimile: (202)986–8102. The Commission will issue a notice or order granting or denying a hearing request or intervention petition, designating the issues for any hearing that will be held, and designating the presiding officer. A notice granting a PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 hearing will be published in the Federal Register and served on the parties to the hearing. As an alternative to requests for hearing and petitions to intervene, by August 26, 2005, persons may submit written comments regarding the license transfer application, as provided for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission will consider and, if appropriate, respond to these comments, but such comments will not otherwise constitute part of the decisional record. Comments should be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, and should cite the publication date and page number of this Federal Register notice. Further Information For further details with respect to this action, see the application dated June 30, 2005, available for public inspection at the Commission’s Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System’s (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1–800– 397–4209, 301–415–4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Dated in Rockville, Maryland this 20th day of July 2005. Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Licensing Section, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. E5–3994 Filed 7–26–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–261] Carolina Power And Light Company, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is considering issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, section 68, ‘‘Criticality Accident Requirements,’’ subsection (b)(1) for Facility Operating E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM 27JYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 143 / Wednesday, July 27, 2005 / Notices License No. DPR–23 issued to the Carolina Power and Light Company (the licensee) for operation of the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBRSEP2) located in Darlington County, South Carolina. The NRC is issuing this environmental assessment pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21 and is making a finding of no significant impact (FONSI). Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.68, ‘‘Criticality Accident Requirements,’’ subsection (b)(1) during the spent fuel pool activities related to the underwater handling, loading, and unloading of the dry shielded canister (DSC) NUHOMS -24PTH as described in proposed Amendment No. 8 to Certificate of Compliance No. 1004 listed in 10 CFR 72.214. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated February 22, 2005, as supplemented on May 10 and July 6, 2005. The Need for the Proposed Action In 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), the Commission sets forth the following requirement that must be met in lieu of a monitoring system capable of detecting criticality events: Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any one time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be safely subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions feasible by unborated water. Section 50.12(a) of 10 CFR allows licensees to request an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 if the application of the regulation is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule and special conditions are met. The licensee stated that compliance with 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is not necessary for underwater handling, loading, and unloading of the DSC NUHOMS–24PTH in the HBRSEP2 spent fuel pool to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) will still be satisfied if the exemption is granted. The details of the NRC staff’s safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation. VerDate jul<14>2003 19:40 Jul 26, 2005 Jkt 205001 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ alternative). 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 The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for HBRSEP2 dated April 1975, and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG–1437 Supplement 13) dated December 2003. Agencies and Persons Consulted On July 11, 2005, the staff consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mr. Michael Gandy of the South Carolina Department of Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the environmental assessment set forth above, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment and is therefore issuing this FONSI. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 43463 For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee’s letters dated February 22, May 10, and July 6, 2005. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July, 2005. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Chandu P. Patel, Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. E5–3995 Filed 7–26–05; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 72–13] Entergy Operations, Inc., Arkansas Nuclear One Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation; Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding a Proposed Exemption Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. AGENCY: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Regan, Senior Project Manager, Spent Fuel Project Office, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC. 20555. Telephone: (301) 415–1179; fax number: (301) 415–1179; e-mail: cmr1@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) is considering a request dated March 21, 2005, from Entergy Operations, Inc. (applicant or Entergy Operations) for exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 72.212(a)(2) and 10 CFR 72.214 pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, for the Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), E:\FR\FM\27JYN1.SGM 27JYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 143 (Wednesday, July 27, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43462-43463]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-3995]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-261]


Carolina Power And Light Company, H. B. Robinson Steam Electric 
Plant, Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, section 68, ``Criticality 
Accident Requirements,'' subsection (b)(1) for Facility Operating

[[Page 43463]]

License No. DPR-23 issued to the Carolina Power and Light Company (the 
licensee) for operation of the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 
No. 2 (HBRSEP2) located in Darlington County, South Carolina. The NRC 
is issuing this environmental assessment pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21 and 
is making a finding of no significant impact (FONSI).

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.68, ``Criticality Accident Requirements,'' subsection 
(b)(1) during the spent fuel pool activities related to the underwater 
handling, loading, and unloading of the dry shielded canister (DSC) 
NUHOMS -24PTH as described in proposed Amendment No. 8 to Certificate 
of Compliance No. 1004 listed in 10 CFR 72.214. The proposed action is 
in accordance with the licensee's application dated February 22, 2005, 
as supplemented on May 10 and July 6, 2005.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    In 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), the Commission sets forth the following 
requirement that must be met in lieu of a monitoring system capable of 
detecting criticality events:

    Plant procedures shall prohibit the handling and storage at any 
one time of more fuel assemblies than have been determined to be 
safely subcritical under the most adverse moderation conditions 
feasible by unborated water.

    Section 50.12(a) of 10 CFR allows licensees to request an exemption 
from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 if the application of the 
regulation is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the 
rule and special conditions are met. The licensee stated that 
compliance with 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) is not necessary for underwater 
handling, loading, and unloading of the DSC NUHOMS-24PTH in the HBRSEP2 
spent fuel pool to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. The NRC 
has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that the underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) will still 
be satisfied if the exemption is granted. The details of the NRC 
staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will 
be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption 
to the regulation.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of 
effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant 
increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. There is no 
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. 
Therefore, there are no significant radiological impacts associated 
with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does 
not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other 
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-
radiological impacts associated with the proposed action.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
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

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for 
HBRSEP2 dated April 1975, and the Final Supplemental Environmental 
Impact Statement (NUREG-1437 Supplement 13) dated December 2003.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    On July 11, 2005, the staff consulted with the South Carolina State 
official, Mr. Michael Gandy of the South Carolina Department of Health, 
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State 
official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment set forth above, the 
NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant 
effect on the quality of the human environment and is therefore issuing 
this FONSI. Accordingly, the NRC 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 letters dated February 22, May 10, and July 6, 2005. 
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records 
will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the 
Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
    Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems 
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR 
Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to 
pdr@nrc.gov.

    Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of July, 2005.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Chandu P. Patel,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-3995 Filed 7-26-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P