Florida Power Corporation, et al.; Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 69710-69711 [2010-28633]
Download as PDF
69710
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2010 / Notices
Plants,’’ and related guidance
documents.
Disposition: On May 13, 2010, the
NRC staff issued the proposed Revision
0 on SRP Section 13.6.6 on ‘‘Cyber
Security Plan,’’ ADAMS Accession No.
ML093560837. There were comments
received on the proposed guidance
(ADAMS Accession No. ML101810249).
These comments were incorporated as
appropriate and the details of
disposition of the stakeholder’s
comments are available under ADAMS
Accession No. ML102590155.
ADDRESSES: The NRC maintains
ADAMS, which provides text and image
files of NRC’s public documents. These
documents may be accessed through the
NRC’s Public Electronic Reading Room
on the Internet at 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 Public Document Room
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail at
pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
Mr.
William F. Burton, Chief, Rulemaking
and Guidance Development Branch,
Division of New Reactor Licensing,
Office of New Reactors, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone at 301–415–
6332 or e-mail at
william.burton@nrc.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The NRC
posts its issued staff guidance on the
NRC external Web page (https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/isg/).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of November 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
William F. Burton,
Chief, Rulemaking and Guidance
Development Branch, Division of New Reactor
Licensing, Office of New Reactors.
[FR Doc. 2010–28634 Filed 11–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
[Docket No. 50–302; NRC–2010–0105]
Florida Power Corporation, et al.;
Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear
Generating Plant Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption, pursuant to
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:04 Nov 12, 2010
Jkt 223001
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5,
‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from the
implementation date for certain new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73,
‘‘Physical protection of plants and
materials,’’ for Facility Operating
License No. DPR 72 issued to Florida
Power Corporation (the licensee), for
operation of the Crystal River Unit 3
Nuclear Generating Plant (CR–3),
located in Citrus County, Florida. In
accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC
prepared an environmental assessment
documenting its finding. The NRC
concluded that the proposed actions
will have no significant environmental
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
the licensee from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for four new requirements of 10 CFR
part 73. Specifically, CR–3 would be
granted a second exemption, further
extending the date for full compliance
with four new requirements contained
in 10 CFR 73.55, from November 15 and
December 15 (the dates specified in a
prior exemption granted by NRC on
March 25, 2010), until December 15,
2011 and March 15, 2012, respectively.
The licensee has proposed an alternate
full compliance implementation date of
March 15, 2012, which is approximately
2 years beyond the compliance date
required by 10 CFR part 73. The
proposed action, an extension of the
schedule for completion of certain
actions required by the revised 10 CFR
part 73, does not involve any physical
changes to the reactor, fuel, plant
structures, support structures, water, or
land at the CR–3 site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
September 8, 2010.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed second scheduler
exemption is needed to provide the
licensee with additional time, beyond
the previously approved by the NRC
letter dated March 25, 2010, to
implement four specific elements of the
new requirements that involve
significant physical upgrades to the CR–
3 security system. The schedules used
in the original scheduler exemption
were based on the conceptual design
information available to the licensee at
the time of the submittal. At this time,
the licensee has fully developed the
design and has completed the discovery
phase. Therefore, due to the unforeseen
need for design changes necessary to
achieve full compliance with the Final
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Rule, additional time is needed to
complete the complex revised design
and construction and associated
analysis.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its
environmental assessment of the
proposed exemption. The NRC staff has
concluded that the proposed action to
further extend the implementation
deadline for two items would not
significantly affect plant safety and
would not have a significant adverse
effect on the probability of an accident
occurring.
The proposed action would not result
in an increased radiological hazard
beyond those hazards previously
analyzed in the environmental
assessment and finding of no significant
impact made by the Commission in
promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR
part 73 as discussed in a Federal
Register notice dated March 27, 2009;
74 FR 13926. There will be no change
to radioactive effluents that affect
radiation exposures to plant workers
and members of the public. Therefore,
no changes or different types of
radiological impacts are expected as a
result of the proposed exemption.
The proposed action does not result
in changes to land use or water use, or
result in changes to the quality or
quantity of nonradiological effluents. 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 threatened, endangered, or
protected species under the Endangered
Species Act, or impacts to essential fish
habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens Act are expected. There are no
impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and
cultural resources. There would be no
impact to socioeconomic resources.
Therefore, no changes to or different
types of nonradiological environmental
impacts are expected as a result of the
proposed exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action. In addition, in promulgating its
revisions to 10 CFR part 73, the
Commission prepared an environmental
assessment and published a finding of
no significant impact [Part 73, Power
Reactor Security Requirements, March
27, 2009; 74 FR 13926].
With its request to extend the
implementation deadline, the licensee
currently maintains a security system
acceptable to the NRC and that will
continue to provide acceptable physical
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2010 / Notices
protection of CR–3 in lieu of the new
requirements in 10 CFR part 73.
Therefore, the extension of the
implementation date for four elements
of the new requirements of 10 CFR part
73 to December 15, 2011, and March 15,
2012, would not have any significant
environmental impacts.
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, if granted.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
actions, the NRC staff considered denial
of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the
exemption request would result in no
change in current environmental
impacts. If the proposed action was
denied, the licensee would have to
comply with the existing
implementation deadline for those
specific items of November 15, and
December 15, 2010, as extended by the
exemption granted on March 25, 2010.
The environmental impacts of the
proposed exemption and the ‘‘no-action’’
alternative 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 CR–3,
dated May 1973.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on November 4, 2010, the NRC staff
consulted with the Florida State official,
Mr. William A. Passeti of the Florida
Department of Health, 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 September 8, 2010. Portions of the
September 8, 2010, submittal contains
security-related information and,
accordingly, a redacted version of this
letter is available for public review in
the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS),
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:04 Nov 12, 2010
Jkt 223001
Accession No. ML102530129. This
document 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 O–
1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly
available records will be accessible
electronically from the 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on
November 5, 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Christopher Gratton,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch II–2, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–28633 Filed 11–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 52–012 and 52–013; NRC–
2010–0343]
STP Nuclear Operating Company,
South Texas Project Nuclear Power
Plant, Units 3 and 4; Exemption
1.0 Background
By letters dated February 2, 2010
(Agency wide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS)
Accession Number ML100350219),
March 23, 2010 (ADAMS Accession
Number ML100880055) and July 21,
2010 (ADAMS Accession Number
ML102070274), STP Nuclear Operating
Company (STPNOC) submitted a
request for an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) part 50, section 50.10: License
required; limited work authorization.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC or the NRC staff) has
reviewed this request for exemption,
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, as it relates
to STPNOC’s application for combined
licenses (COLs) for South Texas Project
(STP) Units 3 and 4, which is currently
under review by the NRC staff. This
exemption would authorize STPNOC to
install two crane foundation retaining
walls (CFRWs) prior to issuance of the
COLs. Granting this exemption would
not constitute a commitment by the
NRC to issue COLs for STP Units 3 and
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
69711
4. STPNOC would install the CFRWs
assuming the risk that its COL
application may later be denied.
2.0 Request/Action
The proposed action, as described in
STPNOC’s request for an exemption to
10 CFR 50.10, would allow STPNOC to
install two CFRWs (one for Unit 3 and
one for Unit 4), prior to issuance of
COLs. According to STPNOC, the
CFRWs are non-safety related, and have
no adverse interactions with any
structures, systems, or components as
identified in 50.10. STPNOC states that
the CFRWs are required to facilitate
excavation activities by retaining soil
next to the excavations of the Reactor
Building, Control Building and Turbine
Building Foundations, while allowing
the crane areas to be at grade and near
the buildings. Installation of the CFRWs
would include the following activities:
• Performing a full-depth and widthslurry excavation;
• Placing of reinforcement in the
slurry trench;
• Displacing the slurry with concrete
from the bottom up; and
• Installing tiebacks and whalers to
stabilize the CFRWs, as excavation for
permanent plant structures proceeds.
As construction of the permanent
plant structures proceeds, the CFRWs
would be abandoned in place following
crane use. After abandonment, the
CFRWs would have no function during
operation of STP Units 3 and 4.
In its exemption request, STPNOC
stated that the proposed exemption is
needed because installation of the
CFRWs must occur before excavation for
permanent plant structures, and
compliance with the requirements for a
limited work authorization as indicated
in 10 CFR 50.10 would result in undue
hardship or other costs that are
significantly in excess of those
contemplated during the development
of 10 CFR 50.10. According to the
exemption request, installation of the
CFRWs is needed to allow STPNOC to
complete certain on-site activities in
parallel with the licensing process, so
that it can begin construction promptly
upon issuance of COLs.
3.0 Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a) the
Commission may, upon application by
any interested person or upon its own
initiative, grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.10 when (1)
the exemption authorized by law, will
not present an undue risk to public
health or safety, and are consistent with
the common defense and security; and
(2) when special circumstances are
present.
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 219 (Monday, November 15, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69710-69711]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28633]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-302; NRC-2010-0105]
Florida Power Corporation, et al.; Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear
Generating Plant Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5, ``Specific exemptions,'' from the
implementation date for certain new requirements of 10 CFR part 73,
``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Facility Operating
License No. DPR 72 issued to Florida Power Corporation (the licensee),
for operation of the Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-
3), located in Citrus County, Florida. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21,
the NRC prepared an environmental assessment documenting its finding.
The NRC concluded that the proposed actions will have no significant
environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for four new requirements of 10
CFR part 73. Specifically, CR-3 would be granted a second exemption,
further extending the date for full compliance with four new
requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.55, from November 15 and December
15 (the dates specified in a prior exemption granted by NRC on March
25, 2010), until December 15, 2011 and March 15, 2012, respectively.
The licensee has proposed an alternate full compliance implementation
date of March 15, 2012, which is approximately 2 years beyond the
compliance date required by 10 CFR part 73. The proposed action, an
extension of the schedule for completion of certain actions required by
the revised 10 CFR part 73, does not involve any physical changes to
the reactor, fuel, plant structures, support structures, water, or land
at the CR-3 site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated September 8, 2010.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed second scheduler exemption is needed to provide the
licensee with additional time, beyond the previously approved by the
NRC letter dated March 25, 2010, to implement four specific elements of
the new requirements that involve significant physical upgrades to the
CR-3 security system. The schedules used in the original scheduler
exemption were based on the conceptual design information available to
the licensee at the time of the submittal. At this time, the licensee
has fully developed the design and has completed the discovery phase.
Therefore, due to the unforeseen need for design changes necessary to
achieve full compliance with the Final Rule, additional time is needed
to complete the complex revised design and construction and associated
analysis.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed
exemption. The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action to
further extend the implementation deadline for two items would not
significantly affect plant safety and would not have a significant
adverse effect on the probability of an accident occurring.
The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological
hazard beyond those hazards previously analyzed in the environmental
assessment and finding of no significant impact made by the Commission
in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73 as discussed in a
Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009; 74 FR 13926. There will
be no change to radioactive effluents that affect radiation exposures
to plant workers and members of the public. Therefore, no changes or
different types of radiological impacts are expected as a result of the
proposed exemption.
The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of nonradiological
effluents. 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 threatened, endangered, or
protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or impacts to
essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act are
expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There
would be no impact to socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no changes to
or different types of nonradiological environmental impacts are
expected as a result of the proposed exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. In addition,
in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73, the Commission
prepared an environmental assessment and published a finding of no
significant impact [Part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, March
27, 2009; 74 FR 13926].
With its request to extend the implementation deadline, the
licensee currently maintains a security system acceptable to the NRC
and that will continue to provide acceptable physical
[[Page 69711]]
protection of CR-3 in lieu of the new requirements in 10 CFR part 73.
Therefore, the extension of the implementation date for four elements
of the new requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to December 15, 2011, and
March 15, 2012, would not have any significant environmental impacts.
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, if granted.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed actions, the NRC staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
Denial of the exemption request would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. If the proposed action was denied, the licensee
would have to comply with the existing implementation deadline for
those specific items of November 15, and December 15, 2010, as extended
by the exemption granted on March 25, 2010. The environmental impacts
of the proposed exemption and the ``no-action'' alternative 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
CR-3, dated May 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on November 4, 2010, the NRC
staff consulted with the Florida State official, Mr. William A. Passeti
of the Florida Department of Health, 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 September 8, 2010. Portions of the September 8,
2010, submittal contains security-related information and, accordingly,
a redacted version of this letter is available for public review in the
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), Accession
No. ML102530129. This document 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 O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, on November 5, 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Christopher Gratton,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-28633 Filed 11-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P