Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact; Carolina Power and Light Company Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, 8903-8904 [2012-3521]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Notices
relevant issue finality provisions in Part
52.
II. Environmental Assessment
Summary
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day
of February 2012.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas H. Boyce,
Chief, Regulatory Guide Development Branch,
Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear
Regulatory Research.
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
the licensee from certain requirements
of 10 CFR 50.46 and appendix K to 10
CFR part 50. Specifically, 10 CFR 50.46,
paragraph (a)(1)(i) provides
requirements for reactors containing
uranium oxide fuel pellets clad in either
zircaloy or ZIRLO. Additionally,
appendix K to 10 CFR part 50 presumes
the use of zircaloy or ZIRLO fuel
cladding when doing calculations for
energy release, cladding oxidation, and
hydrogen generation after a postulated
loss-of-coolant accident. Therefore, both
of these regulations state or assume that
either zircaloy or ZIRLO is used as the
fuel rod cladding material. The
proposed exemption would allow the
licensee use of M5TM cladding fuel
assemblies into the core of HNP Unit 1.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
January 19, 2011.
[FR Doc. 2012–3377 Filed 2–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–400, NRC–2012–0034]
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact;
Carolina Power and Light Company
Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant,
Unit 1
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
I. Introduction
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed exemption is needed to
allow the licensee the use of M5TM alloy
fuel rod cladding at HNP. The licensee
has requested an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 and
appendix K to 10 CFR part 50 to allow
for loading of M5TM clad fuel
assemblies, in lieu of zircaloy or ZIRLO,
into the core during Refueling Outage 17
that is currently scheduled for spring
2012.
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) 50.46,
‘‘Acceptance Criteria for Emergency
Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water
Nuclear Power Reactors,’’ and 10 CFR
part 50, appendix K, ‘‘ECCS [Emergency
Core Cooling System] Evaluation
Models,’’ to allow for the use of M5TM
alloy fuel rod cladding for Renewed
Facility Operating License No. NPF–63,
issued to Carolina Power and Light
Company (the licensee), doing business
as Progress Energy Carolinas Inc., for
operation of the Shearon Harris Nuclear
Power Plant, Unit 1 (HNP), located in
New Hill, North Carolina. In accordance
with 10 CFR 51.21, ‘‘Criteria for and
Identification of Licensing and
Regulatory Actions Requiring
Environmental Assessments,’’ the NRC
staff prepared an environmental
assessment documenting its finding.
The NRC staff concluded that the
proposed action will have no significant
environmental impact.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the proposed action and concludes
that there are no environmental impacts
associated with the proposed
exemption. The details of the NRC
staff’s safety evaluation will be provided
in the exemption that, if approved by
the NRC, 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. No changes
are being made in the types of effluents
that may be released offsite. There is no
significant increase in the amount of
any effluent released offsite. 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 result in changes to land
use or water use, or result in changes to
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
´
Araceli T. Billoch Colon, Project
Manager, Licensing Branch II–2,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Rockville, Maryland, 20822. Telephone:
(301) 415–3302; fax number: (301) 415–
1032; email: Araceli.Billoch@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Feb 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
8903
the quality or quantity of
nonradiological effluents. No changes to
the National Pollutant 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. No impacts to the air or
ambient air quality are expected. There
are no impacts to historic and cultural
resources. In addition, there are also no
known socioeconomic or environmental
justice impacts associated with the
proposed action. 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 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 ECCS rules in 10 CFR
50.46 and appendix K to 10 CFR part 50
and would not be able to use M5TM clad
fuel in the HNP core during the
upcoming refueling outage. 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
considered in the Final Environmental
Statement for HNP, NUREG–0972, dated
October 31, 1983, as supplemented
through the ‘‘Generic Environmental
Impact Statement for License Renewal
of Nuclear Plants: Regarding Shearon
Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1—
Final Report (NUREG–1437,
Supplement 33).’’
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on January 19, 2012 the NRC staff
consulted with the North Carolina State
official, Mr. Lee Cox of the Division of
Radiation Protection, with the North
Carolina Department of Environment
and Natural Resources, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official had no
comments.
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
8904
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 31 / Wednesday, February 15, 2012 / Notices
III. 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.
IV. Further Information
[FR Doc. 2012–3521 Filed 2–14–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2011–0278; Docket No.: 50–286]
Documents related to this action are
available electronically at the NRC
Library at https://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/adams.html. From this site, you can
access the NRC’s Agencywide
Document Access and Management
System (ADAMS), which provides text
and image files of NRC’s public
documents. For further details with
respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee’s letter dated January 19, 2011,
located under ADAMS Accession No.
ML11313A162. 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 email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
These documents may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers
located at the NRC’s Public Document
Room (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 February 2012.
Subject
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
´
Araceli T. Billoch Colon,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch
2–2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Entergy Nuclear Indian Point 3, LLC.;
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.,
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit 3;
Exemption
1.0 Background
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Entergy or the licensee) is the holder of
Facility Operating License No. DPR–64,
which authorizes operation of Indian
Point Nuclear Generating Unit 3 (IP3).
The license provides, among other
things, that the facility is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC
or the Commission) now or hereafter in
effect.
IP3 is a pressurized-water reactor
located approximately 24 miles north of
the New York City boundary line on the
east bank of the Hudson River in
Westchester County, New York.
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) 50.48(b), requires
that nuclear power plants that were
licensed to operate before January 1,
1979, satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR
part 50, Appendix R, ‘‘Fire Protection
Program for Nuclear Power Facilities
Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,’’
Section III.G, ‘‘Fire protection of safe
shutdown capability.’’ The circuit
separation and protection requirements
being addressed in this request for
exemption are specified in Section
III.G.2. Since IP3 was licensed to
operate before January 1, 1979, IP3 is
required to meet Section III.G.2 of
Appendix R to 10 CFR part 50.
The underlying purpose of Section
III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR part 50
is to establish reasonable assurance that
safe shutdown (SSD) of the reactor can
be achieved and maintained in the event
of a postulated fire in any plant area.
Circuits which could cause
maloperation or prevent operation of
redundant trains of equipment required
to achieve and maintain hot shutdown
conditions as a result of fire in a single
fire area must be protected in
accordance with III.G.2. If conformance
with the technical requirements of
III.G.2 cannot be assured in a specific
fire area, an alternative or dedicated
shutdown capability must be provided
in accordance with Section III.G.3, or an
exemption obtained in accordance with
10 CFR 50.12, ‘‘Specific exemptions.’’
By letter dated March 6, 2009, Entergy
requested an exemption from the
requirements of 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix R in accordance with 10 CFR
50.12. Specifically, Entergy requested an
exemption to allow the use of Operator
Manual Actions (OMAs) in lieu of
meeting certain technical requirements
of III.G.2 in Fire Areas AFW–6, ETN–
4{1}, ETN–4{3}, PAB–2{3}, PAB–2{5},
TBL–5, and YARD–7. The table below
provides the dates and topics of the
submittals related to this request.
ADAMS
accession
Author
Date
Description
Entergy .......................
March 6, 2009 ............
Original Submittal ...........................................
ML090760993
Entergy .......................
October 1, 2009 .........
ML092810230
Request for Additional NRC ...........................
Information (RAI) #1.
RAI Response #1 ...... Entergy .......................
January 20, 2010 .......
May 4, 2010 ...............
RAI #2 ........................
NRC ...........................
August 11, 2010 ........
RAI Response #2 ......
Entergy .......................
September 29, 2010 ..
RAI #3 ........................
RAI Response #3 ......
NRC ...........................
Entergy .......................
December 16, 2010 ...
January 19, 2011 .......
Letter to revise previously submitted information.
Letter to revise previously submitted information.
Entergy .......................
February 10, 2011 .....
Revision to March 2009, submittal, incorporated changes to Attachment 2, Technical Basis in Support of Exemption Request.
Request for information on the overall defense-in-depth for each fire zone.
Response to the staff’s January 20, 2010,
RAI.
RAI on reactor coolant system makeup, separation distances, etc.
Response to the staff’s August 11, 2010,
RAI.
RAI on reactor coolant system makeup ........
Responses to the staff’s December 16,
2010, RAI.
Letter updating tables contained in previous
submittals.
Entergy .......................
May 26, 2011 .............
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Exemption Request
from Appendix R.
Revised Exemption
Request.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:09 Feb 14, 2012
Jkt 226001
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Letter updating tables contained in previous
submittals.
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\15FEN1.SGM
15FEN1
ML100150128
ML101320263
ML102180331
ML102930234
ML103500204
ML110310242
ML110540322
ML11158A196
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8903-8904]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3521]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-400, NRC-2012-0034]
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact;
Carolina Power and Light Company Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant,
Unit 1
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Araceli T. Billoch Col[oacute]n,
Project Manager, Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Rockville, Maryland, 20822. Telephone: (301)
415-3302; fax number: (301) 415-1032; email: Araceli.Billoch@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
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) 50.46, ``Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core
Cooling Systems for Light-Water Nuclear Power Reactors,'' and 10 CFR
part 50, appendix K, ``ECCS [Emergency Core Cooling System] Evaluation
Models,'' to allow for the use of M5\TM\ alloy fuel rod cladding for
Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-63, issued to Carolina Power
and Light Company (the licensee), doing business as Progress Energy
Carolinas Inc., for operation of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power
Plant, Unit 1 (HNP), located in New Hill, North Carolina. In accordance
with 10 CFR 51.21, ``Criteria for and Identification of Licensing and
Regulatory Actions Requiring Environmental Assessments,'' the NRC staff
prepared an environmental assessment documenting its finding. The NRC
staff concluded that the proposed action will have no significant
environmental impact.
II. Environmental Assessment Summary
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from certain
requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 and appendix K to 10 CFR part 50.
Specifically, 10 CFR 50.46, paragraph (a)(1)(i) provides requirements
for reactors containing uranium oxide fuel pellets clad in either
zircaloy or ZIRLO. Additionally, appendix K to 10 CFR part 50 presumes
the use of zircaloy or ZIRLO fuel cladding when doing calculations for
energy release, cladding oxidation, and hydrogen generation after a
postulated loss-of-coolant accident. Therefore, both of these
regulations state or assume that either zircaloy or ZIRLO is used as
the fuel rod cladding material. The proposed exemption would allow the
licensee use of M5\TM\ cladding fuel assemblies into the core of HNP
Unit 1. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated January 19, 2011.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed exemption is needed to allow the licensee the use of
M5\TM\ alloy fuel rod cladding at HNP. The licensee has requested an
exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 and appendix K to 10
CFR part 50 to allow for loading of M5\TM\ clad fuel assemblies, in
lieu of zircaloy or ZIRLO, into the core during Refueling Outage 17
that is currently scheduled for spring 2012.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that there are no environmental impacts associated with the
proposed exemption. The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation
will be provided in the exemption that, if approved by the NRC, 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. No changes are being made in the types of
effluents that may be released offsite. There is no significant
increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. 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 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 Pollutant 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. No impacts to
the air or ambient air quality are expected. There are no impacts to
historic and cultural resources. In addition, there are also no known
socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with the
proposed action. 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 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 ECCS rules in 10 CFR 50.46 and appendix K
to 10 CFR part 50 and would not be able to use M5\TM\ clad fuel in the
HNP core during the upcoming refueling outage. 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 considered in the Final Environmental Statement for HNP, NUREG-
0972, dated October 31, 1983, as supplemented through the ``Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants:
Regarding Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1--Final Report
(NUREG-1437, Supplement 33).''
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on January 19, 2012 the NRC
staff consulted with the North Carolina State official, Mr. Lee Cox of
the Division of Radiation Protection, with the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no
comments.
[[Page 8904]]
III. 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.
IV. Further Information
Documents related to this action are available electronically at
the NRC Library at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this
site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Document Access and
Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC's
public documents. For further details with respect to the proposed
action, see the licensee's letter dated January 19, 2011, located under
ADAMS Accession No. ML11313A162. 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 email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public
computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (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 February 2012.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Araceli T. Billoch Col[oacute]n,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 2-2, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2012-3521 Filed 2-14-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
