Florida Power and Light Company; Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 3 and 4 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 56188-56189 [06-8220]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
56188
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 26, 2006 / Notices
In accordance with 10 CFR Part 51,
the Commission will also prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action. Pursuant to 10 CFR
51.26, and as part of the environmental
scoping process, the staff intends to
hold a public scoping meeting. Detailed
information regarding this meeting will
be included in a future Federal Register
notice.
Finally, the Commission will
announce, in a future Federal Register
notice, the opportunity to petition for
leave to intervene in the hearing
required for this application by 10 CFR
52.21.
A copy of the Southern Nuclear
Operating Company ESP application is
available for public inspection at the
Commission’s Public Document Room
located at One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland, and at the Burke County
Library in Waynesboro, Georgia. It is
also accessible electronically from the
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html
(ADAMS Accession No. ML062290246).
Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS, or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC Public
Document Room staff by telephone at 1–
800–397–4209, 301–415–4737 or by email to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 19th day
of September, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David B. Matthews,
Director, Division of New Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06–8221 Filed 9–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–250 and 50–251]
pwalker on PRODPC60 with NOTICES
Florida Power and Light Company;
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos.
3 and 4 Environmental Assessment
and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) part 50, Appendix R, Subsection
III.G.3, for Facility Operating License
Nos. DPR–31 and DPR–41, issued to
Florida Power and Light Company (the
licensee), for operation of the Turkey
Point Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4,
respectively, located in Miami-Dade
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:03 Sep 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
County, approximately 25 miles south
of Miami, Florida. Therefore, as
required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is
issuing this environmental assessment
and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
the licensee from the requirements of 10
CFR part 50, Appendix R, Subsection
III.G.3 for fixed suppression in the
Mechanical Equipment Room and for
detection and fixed suppression in the
subsection of the Control Building that
contains the Control Room Roof at the
Turkey Point Nuclear Plant.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
December 27, 2004, as supplemented by
letters dated May 23, 2005, January 13,
2006, and July 12, 2006.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Fire protection features for assuring
alternative or dedicated shutdown
capability in the event of a fire are
addressed in 10 CFR, part 50, Appendix
R, Subsection III.G.3, which requires
that fire detection and a fixed fire
suppression system be installed in the
area, room, or zone where equipment or
components are relied on for the
assured shutdown capability.
The NRC approved the alternate
shutdown capability proposed by the
licensee for Turkey Point, Units 3 and
4, for compliance with the requirements
of III.G.3, in a safety evaluation dated
April 16, 1984. The Control Room was
one of the areas approved. However, the
Mechanical Equipment Room and
Control Room Roof, which are identified
in the plant fire protection program
report as part of the Control Room fire
area, were not included. In February
2004, during an NRC triennial fire
inspection at Turkey Point, the
inspection team reviewed fire protection
systems, features, and equipment, and
found that all fire zones supporting the
alternate safe shutdown function for the
Control Room do not provide fire
detection and a fixed suppression
system in accordance with the
requirements of III.G.3, for both Turkey
Point units. Specifically, the Mechanical
Equipment Room does not have full area
detection and fixed suppression. In
response to this inspection finding, the
licensee declared the detection and
suppression inoperable for the
Mechanical Equipment Room (and the
Control Room Roof, which also fails to
provide detection and fixed
suppression) and established an hourly
fire watch. The licensee proposed to
install a fire detection system in the
PO 00000
Frm 00089
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Mechanical Equipment Room and
requested exemption from the
requirements for fixed suppression in
the Mechanical Equipment Room and
for detection and fixed suppression on
the Control Room Roof. The proposed
action would restore system operability
and eliminate the need to institute
compensatory measures.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its safety
evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that, based on the existing
fire protection features, the proposed
installation of new detection equipment
in the Mechanical Equipment Room,
low combustible loading, existing
administrative controls for
combustibles, and availability of nearby
suppression equipment, there is
reasonable assurance of adequate
suppression capability in the affected
fire zones. Also, in the event of a fireinduced failure of safety-related
equipment resulting in a loss of Control
Room heating, ventilation and air
conditioning equipment, there is
reasonable assurance that there would
be adequate time to evacuate the Control
Room, if necessary, and shut down the
plant from the Alternate Shutdown
Panel. Therefore, assurance of
alternative or dedicated shutdown
capability in the event of a fire is
achieved.
The proposed action is contingent
upon installation of new area fire
detection equipment in the Mechanical
Equipment Room, maintaining existing
or comparable separation and protection
for redundant safe shutdown equipment
on the Control Room Roof, the
availability of manual fire fighting and
associated fire fighting equipment, and
maintaining existing or comparable
administrative controls for
combustibles. The details of the 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.
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents because the
exemption is based on the existing fire
barriers at Turkey Point, fire protection
measures, availability of nearby
suppression equipment, low
combustible loading, existing
administrative controls for
combustibles, and installation of new
fire detection equipment in the
Mechanical Equipment Room. No new
accident precursors are created by the
proposed exemption and the
consequences of postulated accidents
are not increased. No changes are being
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 186 / Tuesday, September 26, 2006 / Notices
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
environmental 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
nonradiological environmental 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 Turkey
Point Units 3 and 4, dated January 1972,
and Final Supplemental Environmental
Impact Statement (NUREG–1437
Supplement 5) dated January 2002.
pwalker on PRODPC60 with NOTICES
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on August 7, 2006, the staff consulted
with the Florida State official, William
Passetti of the Bureau of Radiation
Control, 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, the NRC concludes that the
proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. 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 letter
dated December 27, 2004, as
supplemented by letters dated May 23,
2005, January 13, 2006, and July 12,
2006. Documents may be examined,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
21:03 Sep 25, 2006
Jkt 208001
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’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 (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site, https://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 or 301–
415–4737, or send an e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day
of September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brendan T. Moroney,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II–
2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06–8220 Filed 9–25–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Biweekly Notice; Applications and
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses Involving No Significant
Hazards Considerations
I. Background
Pursuant to section 189a. (2) of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended
(the Act), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (the Commission or NRC
staff) is publishing this regular biweekly
notice. The Act requires the
Commission publish notice of any
amendments issued, or proposed to be
issued and grants the Commission the
authority to issue and make
immediately effective any amendment
to an operating license upon a
determination by the Commission that
such amendment involves no significant
hazards consideration, notwithstanding
the pendency before the Commission of
a request for a hearing from any person.
This biweekly notice includes all
notices of amendments issued, or
proposed to be issued from September
1, 2006, to September 14, 2006. The last
biweekly notice was published on
September 12, 2006 (71 FR 53715).
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56189
Notice of Consideration of Issuance of
Amendments to Facility Operating
Licenses, Proposed No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
and Opportunity for a Hearing
The Commission has made a
proposed determination that the
following amendment requests involve
no significant hazards consideration.
Under the Commission’s regulations in
10 CFR 50.92, this means that operation
of the facility in accordance with the
proposed amendment would not (1)
involve a significant increase in the
probability or consequences of an
accident previously evaluated; or (2)
create the possibility of a new or
different kind of accident from any
accident previously evaluated; or (3)
involve a significant reduction in a
margin of safety. The basis for this
proposed determination for each
amendment request is shown below.
The Commission is seeking public
comments on this proposed
determination. Any comments received
within 30 days after the date of
publication of this notice will be
considered in making any final
determination. Within 60 days after the
date of publication of this notice, the
licensee may file a request for a hearing
with respect to issuance of the
amendment to the subject facility
operating license and any person whose
interest may be affected by this
proceeding and who wishes to
participate as a party in the proceeding
must file a written request for a hearing
and a petition for leave to intervene.
Normally, the Commission will not
issue the amendment until the
expiration of 60 days after the date of
publication of this notice. The
Commission may issue the license
amendment before expiration of the 60day period provided that its final
determination is that the amendment
involves no significant hazards
consideration. In addition, the
Commission may issue the amendment
prior to the expiration of the 30-day
comment period should circumstances
change during the 30-day comment
period such that failure to act in a
timely way would result, for example in
derating or shutdown of the facility.
Should the Commission take action
prior to the expiration of either the
comment period or the notice period, it
will publish in the Federal Register a
notice of issuance. Should the
Commission make a final No Significant
Hazards Consideration Determination,
any hearing will take place after
issuance. The Commission expects that
the need to take this action will occur
very infrequently.
E:\FR\FM\26SEN1.SGM
26SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 186 (Tuesday, September 26, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56188-56189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8220]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251]
Florida Power and Light Company; Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Unit
Nos. 3 and 4 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Appendix R, Subsection III.G.3, for
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41, issued to Florida
Power and Light Company (the licensee), for operation of the Turkey
Point Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4, respectively, located in Miami-Dade
County, approximately 25 miles south of Miami, Florida. Therefore, as
required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental
assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements
of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, Subsection III.G.3 for fixed suppression
in the Mechanical Equipment Room and for detection and fixed
suppression in the subsection of the Control Building that contains the
Control Room Roof at the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated December 27, 2004, as supplemented by letters dated
May 23, 2005, January 13, 2006, and July 12, 2006.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Fire protection features for assuring alternative or dedicated
shutdown capability in the event of a fire are addressed in 10 CFR,
part 50, Appendix R, Subsection III.G.3, which requires that fire
detection and a fixed fire suppression system be installed in the area,
room, or zone where equipment or components are relied on for the
assured shutdown capability.
The NRC approved the alternate shutdown capability proposed by the
licensee for Turkey Point, Units 3 and 4, for compliance with the
requirements of III.G.3, in a safety evaluation dated April 16, 1984.
The Control Room was one of the areas approved. However, the Mechanical
Equipment Room and Control Room Roof, which are identified in the plant
fire protection program report as part of the Control Room fire area,
were not included. In February 2004, during an NRC triennial fire
inspection at Turkey Point, the inspection team reviewed fire
protection systems, features, and equipment, and found that all fire
zones supporting the alternate safe shutdown function for the Control
Room do not provide fire detection and a fixed suppression system in
accordance with the requirements of III.G.3, for both Turkey Point
units. Specifically, the Mechanical Equipment Room does not have full
area detection and fixed suppression. In response to this inspection
finding, the licensee declared the detection and suppression inoperable
for the Mechanical Equipment Room (and the Control Room Roof, which
also fails to provide detection and fixed suppression) and established
an hourly fire watch. The licensee proposed to install a fire detection
system in the Mechanical Equipment Room and requested exemption from
the requirements for fixed suppression in the Mechanical Equipment Room
and for detection and fixed suppression on the Control Room Roof. The
proposed action would restore system operability and eliminate the need
to institute compensatory measures.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that, based on the existing fire protection features, the
proposed installation of new detection equipment in the Mechanical
Equipment Room, low combustible loading, existing administrative
controls for combustibles, and availability of nearby suppression
equipment, there is reasonable assurance of adequate suppression
capability in the affected fire zones. Also, in the event of a fire-
induced failure of safety-related equipment resulting in a loss of
Control Room heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment, there
is reasonable assurance that there would be adequate time to evacuate
the Control Room, if necessary, and shut down the plant from the
Alternate Shutdown Panel. Therefore, assurance of alternative or
dedicated shutdown capability in the event of a fire is achieved.
The proposed action is contingent upon installation of new area
fire detection equipment in the Mechanical Equipment Room, maintaining
existing or comparable separation and protection for redundant safe
shutdown equipment on the Control Room Roof, the availability of manual
fire fighting and associated fire fighting equipment, and maintaining
existing or comparable administrative controls for combustibles. The
details of the 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.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents because the exemption is based on the
existing fire barriers at Turkey Point, fire protection measures,
availability of nearby suppression equipment, low combustible loading,
existing administrative controls for combustibles, and installation of
new fire detection equipment in the Mechanical Equipment Room. No new
accident precursors are created by the proposed exemption and the
consequences of postulated accidents are not increased. No changes are
being
[[Page 56189]]
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
environmental 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
nonradiological environmental 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
Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, dated January 1972, and Final Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (NUREG-1437 Supplement 5) dated January
2002.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 7, 2006, the staff
consulted with the Florida State official, William Passetti of the
Bureau of Radiation Control, 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, the NRC concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. 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 letter dated December 27, 2004, as supplemented by letters
dated May 23, 2005, January 13, 2006, and July 12, 2006. Documents may
be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC'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 (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on
the Internet at the NRC Web site, https://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 or 301-415-4737,
or send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of September 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brendan T. Moroney,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06-8220 Filed 9-25-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
