Virginia Electric and Power Company, Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 71165-71166 [E7-24290]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2007 / Notices
accession number for the license
amendment is ML073190567. If you do
not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR)
Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737 or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
These documents may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers
located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day
of December, 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Kevin M. Ramsey,
Acting Chief, Fuel Manufacturing Branch,
Fuel Facility Licensing Directorate, Division
of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office
of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E7–24289 Filed 12–13–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–280 And 50–281]
Virginia Electric and Power Company,
Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and
2; Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an amendment to revise the
licensing basis for Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR–32 and DPR–37,
issued to Virginia Electric and Power
Company (the licensee), for operation of
the Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1
and 2 (Surry 1 and 2), located in Surry
county, Virginia. Therefore, as required
by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would authorize
the licensee to revise the Updated Final
Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) to
permit an increase in the irradiation of
the Surry 1 and 2 fuel assemblies
beginning with Surry 1 and 2 improved
fuel (SIF) assemblies with ZIRLO
cladding from a lead rod average burnup
of 60,000 to 62,000 megawatt days
(MWd)/metric tons of uranium (MTU).
Since the burnup restriction is not
explicitly stated in the Surry 1 and 2
license conditions or Technical
Specifications, the licensee incorporated
it into Section 3.5.2.6.1 of the Surry 1
and 2 UFSAR to ensure that the burnup
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:31 Dec 13, 2007
Jkt 214001
limit is not exceeded when reload
design evaluations are performed. The
licensee will continue to apply the
current burnup limit of 60,000 MWd/
MTU for old fuel assemblies, if used, in
the spent fuel pool with Zircaloy-4
cladding. In addition, the licensee will
maintain the peak rod average burnup
limits in the Surry 1 and 2 UFSAR.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
March 6, 2007.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action will allow the
licensee to design reloads to a lead rod
average burnup limit of 62,000 MWd/
MTU, which has an appreciable
economic benefit. The licensee states
that ‘‘Recent reload patterns have been
degraded at an economic penalty to
maintain the burnup below the existing
limit [60,000 MWd/MTU].’’
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its safety
evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that SIF mechanical design,
LOCA analysis, non-LOCA transient
analyses, and the proposed UFSAR
changes are acceptable to a peak rod
average of 62,000 MWd/MTU. The NRC
staff previously completed an
environmental assessment of the effects
of extending fuel burnup above 60,000
MWd/MTU through NUREG/CR–6703
(Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML010310298), and
determined that there are no significant
adverse environmental impacts
associated with extending peak-rod fuel
burnup to 62,000 MWd/MTU. The
environmental effects of extending
Surry 1 and 2 lead rod average burnup
limit to 62,000 MWd/MTU are also
bounded by NUREG/CR–6703.
The details of the staff’s safety
evaluation will be provided in the
license amendment that will be issued
as part of the letter to the licensee
approving the license amendment to the
regulation.
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
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
71165
any historic site. The proposed action
does not result in any significant
changes to land use or water use, or
result in any significant changes to the
quality or quantity of effluents. It does
not affect non-radiological plant
effluents and no changes to the National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System
permit are needed. No effects on the
aquatic or terrestrial habitat in the
vicinity of the plant, or to endangered
or threatened species, or to the habitats
of endangered or threatened species are
expected, and has no other
environmental impact, therefore, there
are no significant non-radiological
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
The proposed action will not change
the method of generating electricity or
the method of handling any effluents
from the environment or nonradiological effluents to the
environment. Therefore, no changes or
different types of non-radiological
environmental impacts are expected as
a result of the proposed amendments.
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 significant 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 Surry 1
and 2, May and June 1972, respectively,
and the supplemental environmental
impact assessment for license renewal
issued on November 30, 2002.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on November 27, 2007, the staff
consulted with Mr. Les Foldesi, Director
of the Bureau of Radiological Health,
Commonwealth of Virginia, 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
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
71166
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2007 / Notices
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 March 6, 2007 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML070720620).
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 10th day
of December 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Siva P. Lingam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II–
1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–24290 Filed 12–13–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Independent External Review Panel To
Identify Vulnerabilities in the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s
Materials Licensing Program: Meeting
Notice
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Meeting.
rmajette on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NRC will convene a meeting
of the Independent External Review
Panel to Identify Vulnerabilities in the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s
(NRC) Materials Licensing Program from
January 8 through January 11, 2008. A
sample of agenda items to be discussed
during the public session includes: (1)
The NRC’s basis for classifying Category
3.5 sources; (2) Web-based Licensing; (3)
National Source Tracking System; and
(4) source security. A copy of the agenda
for the meeting can be obtained by emailing Mr. Aaron T. McCraw at the
contact information below.
Purpose: Continue the panel’s
assessment of the NRC’s licensing
program by exploring Web-based
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:31 Dec 13, 2007
Jkt 214001
Licensing, the National Source Tracking
System, and the NRC’s measures to
enhance source security.
Date and Time for Closed Sessions:
January 11, 2008, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.
This session will be closed so that NRC
staff and the Review Panel can discuss
safeguards information and predecisional information pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 552b (c)(3) and 5 U.S.C. 552b
(c)(9)(B), respectively.
Date and Time for Open Sessions:
January 8, 2008, from 2 p.m. to 4:30
p.m.; and January 9–10, from 9 a.m. to
4:30 p.m.
Address for Public Meeting: U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Two
White Flint North Building, 11545
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852. Specific room locations will be
indicated for each day on the agenda.
Public Participation: Any member of
the public who wishes to participate in
the meeting should contact Mr. McCraw
using the information below.
Contact Information: Aaron T.
McCraw, e-mail: atm@nrc.gov,
telephone: (301) 415–1277.
Conduct of the Meeting
Mr. Thomas E. Hill will chair the
meeting. Mr. Hill will conduct the
meeting in a manner that will facilitate
the orderly conduct of business. The
following procedures apply to public
participation in the meeting:
1. Persons who wish to provide a
written statement should submit an
electronic copy to Mr. McCraw at the
contact information listed above. All
submittals must be received by January
1, 2008, and must pertain to the topics
on the agenda for the meeting.
2. Questions and comments from
members of the public will be permitted
during the meeting, at the discretion of
the Chairman.
3. The transcript and written
comments will be available for
inspection at the NRC Public Document
Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852–2738, telephone (800)
397–4209, on or about May 1, 2008.
4. Persons who require special
services, such as those for the hearing
impaired, should notify Mr. McCraw of
their planned attendance.
This meeting will be held in
accordance with the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended (primarily Section
161a); the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (5 U.S.C. App); and the
Commission’s regulations in Title 10,
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 7.
Dated: December 10, 2007.
Andrew L. Bates,
Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. E7–24286 Filed 12–13–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Procurement Thresholds for
Implementation of the Trade
Agreements Act of 1979
Office of the United States
Trade Representative.
ACTION: Determination of procurement
thresholds under the World Trade
Organization Agreement on Government
Procurement, the United StatesAustralia Free Trade Agreement, the
United States-Bahrain Free Trade
Agreement, the United States-Chile Free
Trade Agreement, the Dominican
Republic-Central American-United
States Free Trade Agreement, the United
States-Morocco Free Trade Agreement,
the North American Free Trade
Agreement, and the United StatesSingapore Free Trade Agreement.
AGENCY:
Jean
Heilman Grier, Senior Procurement
Negotiator, Office of the United States
Trade Representative, (202) 395–9476 or
Jean_Grier@ustr.eop.gov.
SUMMARY: Executive Order 12260
requires the United States Trade
Representative to set the U.S. dollar
thresholds for application of Title III of
the Trade Agreements Act of 1979, as
amended (19 U.S.C. 2511 et seq.), which
implements U.S. trade agreement
obligations, including those under the
World Trade Organization (WTO)
Agreement on Government
Procurement, Chapter 15 of the United
States-Australia Free Trade Agreement
(U.S.-Australia FTA), Chapter 9 of the
United States-Bahrain Free Trade
Agreement (U.S.-Bahrain FTA), Chapter
9 of the United States-Chile Free Trade
Agreement (U.S.-Chile FTA), Chapter 9
of the Dominican Republic-Central
American-United States (DR-CAFTA),
Chapter 9 of the United States-Morocco
Free Trade Agreement (U.S.-Morocco
FTA), Chapter 10 of the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and
Chapter 13 of the United StatesSingapore Free Trade Agreement (U.S.Singapore FTA). These obligations
apply to covered procurements valued
at or above specified U.S. dollar
thresholds.
Now, therefore, I, Susan C. Schwab,
United States Trade Representative, in
conformity with the provisions of
Executive Order 12260, and in order to
carry out U.S. trade agreement
obligations under the WTO Agreement
on Government Procurement, Chapter
15 of the U.S.-Australia FTA, Chapter 9
of the U.S.-Bahrain FTA, Chapter 9 of
the U.S.-Chile FTA, Chapter 9 of DRCAFTA, Chapter 9 of the U.S.-Morocco
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
E:\FR\FM\14DEN1.SGM
14DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 240 (Friday, December 14, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71165-71166]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-24290]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-280 And 50-281]
Virginia Electric and Power Company, Surry Power Station, Unit
Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an amendment to revise the licensing basis for Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37, issued to Virginia Electric
and Power Company (the licensee), for operation of the Surry Power
Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Surry 1 and 2), located in Surry county,
Virginia. 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 authorize the licensee to revise the
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) to permit an increase in
the irradiation of the Surry 1 and 2 fuel assemblies beginning with
Surry 1 and 2 improved fuel (SIF) assemblies with ZIRLO cladding from a
lead rod average burnup of 60,000 to 62,000 megawatt days (MWd)/metric
tons of uranium (MTU). Since the burnup restriction is not explicitly
stated in the Surry 1 and 2 license conditions or Technical
Specifications, the licensee incorporated it into Section 3.5.2.6.1 of
the Surry 1 and 2 UFSAR to ensure that the burnup limit is not exceeded
when reload design evaluations are performed. The licensee will
continue to apply the current burnup limit of 60,000 MWd/MTU for old
fuel assemblies, if used, in the spent fuel pool with Zircaloy-4
cladding. In addition, the licensee will maintain the peak rod average
burnup limits in the Surry 1 and 2 UFSAR.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated March 6, 2007.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action will allow the licensee to design reloads to a
lead rod average burnup limit of 62,000 MWd/MTU, which has an
appreciable economic benefit. The licensee states that ``Recent reload
patterns have been degraded at an economic penalty to maintain the
burnup below the existing limit [60,000 MWd/MTU].''
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that SIF mechanical design, LOCA analysis, non-LOCA
transient analyses, and the proposed UFSAR changes are acceptable to a
peak rod average of 62,000 MWd/MTU. The NRC staff previously completed
an environmental assessment of the effects of extending fuel burnup
above 60,000 MWd/MTU through NUREG/CR-6703 (Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML010310298), and
determined that there are no significant adverse environmental impacts
associated with extending peak-rod fuel burnup to 62,000 MWd/MTU. The
environmental effects of extending Surry 1 and 2 lead rod average
burnup limit to 62,000 MWd/MTU are also bounded by NUREG/CR-6703.
The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in
the license amendment that will be issued as part of the letter to the
licensee approving the license amendment to the regulation.
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 environmental 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 site. The
proposed action does not result in any significant changes to land use
or water use, or result in any significant changes to the quality or
quantity of effluents. It does not affect non-radiological plant
effluents and no changes to the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to endangered or
threatened species, or to the habitats of endangered or threatened
species are expected, and has no other environmental impact, therefore,
there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
The proposed action will not change the method of generating
electricity or the method of handling any effluents from the
environment or non-radiological effluents to the environment.
Therefore, no changes or different types of non-radiological
environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed
amendments.
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 significant 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
Surry 1 and 2, May and June 1972, respectively, and the supplemental
environmental impact assessment for license renewal issued on November
30, 2002.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on November 27, 2007, the
staff consulted with Mr. Les Foldesi, Director of the Bureau of
Radiological Health, Commonwealth of Virginia, 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
[[Page 71166]]
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 March 6, 2007 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML070720620). 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 10th day of December 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Siva P. Lingam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-24290 Filed 12-13-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
