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 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, 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 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, 
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 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