Florida Power & Light Company; Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4, 44464-44470 [2014-18159]
Download as PDF
44464
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
discharge from the wet weather
facilities; and (3) all defendants are in
violation of the Clean Water Act and
their NPDES permits because they have
unlawful sanitary sewer overflows
(‘‘SSOs’’) during wet weather.
The proposed Consent Decree
implements a regional asset
management program that puts the
defendants on a path to eliminate
prohibited wet weather facility
discharges by December 31, 2035, and to
control SSOs within ten years of Decree
entry. Among other things, the
defendants will rehabilitate and clean
sanitary sewer infrastructure, identify
and eliminate sources of inflow and
rapid infiltration to the sewer systems,
and continue to require repair or
replacement of private sewer laterals
under local and regional ordinances.
In addition, each defendant will pay
a civil penalty for its past violations, for
a total of $1,563,556 in civil penalties.
EBMUD will pay $201,600; the City of
Alameda will pay $111,150; the City of
Albany will pay $42,038; the City of
Berkeley will pay $267,000; the City of
Emeryville will pay $1,870; the City of
Oakland will pay $850,000; the City of
Piedmont will pay $41,038; and the
Stege Sanitary District will pay $48,860.
The proposed Consent Decree
replaces a January 2009 interim
settlement with EBMUD and a March
2011 interim settlement with the
Satellite Communities.
The publication of this notice opens
a period for public comment on the
proposed Consent Decree. Comments
should be addressed to the Assistant
Attorney General, Environment and
Natural Resources Division, and should
refer to United States of America et al.
v. East Bay Municipal Utility District et
al., D.J. Ref. No. 90–5–1–1–09361. All
comments must be submitted no later
than thirty (30) days after the
publication date of this notice.
Comments may be submitted either by
email or by mail:
To submit
comments:
Send them to:
By email .......
pubcomment-ees.enrd@
usdoj.gov.
Assistant Attorney General,
U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O.
Box 7611, Washington, DC
20044–7611.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
By mail .........
During the public comment period,
the proposed Consent Decree may be
examined and downloaded at this
Department of Justice Web site: https://
www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_
Decrees.html. We will provide a paper
copy of the proposed Consent Decree
upon written request and payment of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
reproduction costs. Please mail your
request and payment to: Consent Decree
Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box
7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611.
Please enclose a check or money order
for $54.25 (25 cents per page
reproduction cost) payable to the U.S.
Treasury.
Henry Friedman,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
written request and payment of
reproduction costs. Please mail your
request and payment to: Consent Decree
Library, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box
7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611.
Please enclose a check or money order
for $3 (25 cents per page reproduction
cost) payable to the United States
Treasury.
[FR Doc. 2014–18047 Filed 7–30–14; 8:45 am]
Susan Akers,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
[FR Doc. 2014–17980 Filed 7–30–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Proposed Joint
Stipulation under the Clean Water Act
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
On July 25, 2014, the Department of
Justice lodged a proposed settlement
with the United States District Court for
the District of Alaska in the lawsuit
entitled United States and Alaska v. BP
(Exploration) Alaska, Inc., Civil Action
No. 3:14–cv–00146.
The United States and State of Alaska
filed this lawsuit under the Clean Water
Act against BP (Exploration) Alaska, Inc.
The complaint seeks civil penalties and
injunctive relief for violations of the
Clean Water Act, as amended by the Oil
Pollution Act of 1990, 33 U.S.C. 2701 et
seq., and Alaska Statutes 46.03.710 and
46.03.740. The settlement provides a
covenant not to sue in return for
defendant’s payment of $450,000.
The publication of this notice opens
a period for public comment on the
settlement. Comments should be
addressed to the Assistant Attorney
General, Environment and Natural
Resources Division, and should refer to
United States and Alaska v. BP
(Exploration) Alaska, Inc., D.J. Ref. No.
90–5–1–1–08808/1. All comments must
be submitted no later than thirty (30)
days after the publication date of this
notice. Comments may be submitted
either by email or by mail:
[Docket Nos. 50–250 and 50–251; NRC–
2014–0181]
To submit comments:
Send them to:
By email .................
pubcommentees.enrd@usdoj.gov.
Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ–
ENRD, P.O. Box
7611, Washington,
DC 20044–7611.
By mail ...................
During the public comment period,
the settlement may be examined and
downloaded at this Justice Department
Web site: https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/
Consent_Decrees.html. We will provide
a paper copy of the settlement upon
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Florida Power & Light Company;
Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit
Nos. 3 and 4
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and
final finding of no significant impact;
issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of amendments to Renewed
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–31
and DPR–41 issued to Florida Power &
Light Company (FPL, the licensee) for
operation of Turkey Point Nuclear
Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 (Turkey
Point) located in Homestead, MiamiDade County, Florida. The proposed
amendments would increase the
ultimate heat sink (UHS) water
temperature limit specified in the
Turkey Point Technical Specifications
(TSs) from 100 degrees Fahrenheit (°F)
to 104 °F and add a surveillance
requirement to monitor the UHS
temperature more frequently if the UHS
temperature approaches the new limit.
The NRC did not identify any
significant environmental impacts
associated with the proposed license
amendments based on its evaluation of
the information provided in the
licensee’s application and other
available information. Accordingly, the
NRC has prepared this Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Final Finding of
No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the
proposed license amendments.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2014–0181 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may access publicly available
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2011–0181. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–287–3422;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly
available documents online in the NRC
Public Documents collection at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
To begin the search, select ‘‘ADAMS
Public Documents’’ and then select
‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.’’ For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by email to pdr.resource@
nrc.gov. The ADAMS accession number
for each document referenced in this
notice (if that document is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
a document is referenced. For the
convenience of the reader, the ADAMS
accession numbers are also provided in
a table in the ‘‘Availability of
Documents’’ section of this document.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Audrey L. Klett, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–
0489; email: Audrey.Klett@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering issuance of
amendments to Renewed Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–31 and
DPR–41 issued to FPL for operation of
Turkey Point, located in Homestead,
Miami-Dade County, Florida. As
required by § 51.21 of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR
Part 51.21), the NRC staff performed an
EA to document its findings related to
the proposed license amendments. FPL
submitted its license amendment
request by letter dated July 10, 2014
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14196A006)
and subsequently supplemented its
application by letters dated July 17,
2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14202A392), July 22, 2014 (ADAMS
Accession Nos. ML14204A367 and
ML14204A368), and July 24, 2014
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14206A853).
Based on information provided in FPL’s
application and associated supplements,
the NRC staff’s independent review, and
the NRC’s consultation with the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA),
the NRC did not identify any significant
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed license amendments.
Based on the results of the EA
documented herein, the NRC is issuing
this final FONSI, in accordance with 10
CFR 51.32, for the proposed license
amendments.
II. Environmental Assessment
Plant Site and Environs
The Turkey Point site encompasses
11,000 acres (ac) (4,450 hectares (ha)) in
Miami-Dade County, Florida. The site
lies 25 miles (mi) (40 kilometers [km])
south of Miami, Florida, and the nearest
city limits are Florida City, which lies
8 mi (13 km) to the west, Homestead,
which lies 4.5 mi (7 km) to the
northwest, and Key Largo, which lies 10
mi (16 km) south of the Turkey Point
site. The Turkey Point site is bordered
to the east by Biscayne National Park, to
the north by Homestead Bayfront Park
and a portion of Biscayne National Park,
and on the west and south by FPL’s
13,000-ac (5,260-ha) Everglades
Mitigation Bank. The Turkey Point site
includes five electric generating units.
Units 1, 2, and 5 are fossil-fueled
generating units and are not covered by
the proposed licensing action; Units 3
and 4 are nuclear generating units. Each
nuclear reactor is a Westinghouse
pressurized light-water reactor that
generates electricity via three steam
generators that produce steam that turns
turbines. The site features a 6,100-ac
(2,500-ha) closed cooling canal system
(CCS) that cools heated water
discharged by Units 1 through 4. Unit 5
uses mechanical draft cooling towers for
cooling, draws makeup water from the
Upper Floridan Aquifer, and discharges
blowdown to the CCS. The five units
and supporting equipment (excluding
the CCS) occupy approximately 130 ac
(53 ha).
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission
(AEC), the NRC’s predecessor agency,
and the NRC have previously conducted
environmental reviews of Turkey Point
in several documents, and the
descriptions therein continue to
accurately depict the Turkey Point site
and environs. Those documents include
the AEC’s July 1972 Final
Environmental Statement (FES); the
NRC’s January 2002 Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
44465
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants:
Regarding Turkey Point Units 3 and 4—
Final Report (NUREG–1437,
Supplement 5) (ADAMS Accession No.
ML020280236); and the NRC’s March
2012 environmental assessment and
final FONSI for the Turkey Point
extended power uprate (EPU) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML12074A251).
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would increase
the UHS water temperature limit
specified in the Turkey Point TSs and
add a surveillance requirement to
monitor the UHS temperature more
frequently if the UHS temperature
approaches the new limit. The proposed
action is in accordance with the
licensee’s application dated July 10,
2014, as supplemented by letters dated
July 17, July 22 (two letters), and July
24, 2014.
More specifically, the proposed action
would amend Appendix A of Turkey
Point’s Renewed Facility Operating
Licenses in order to revise the UHS
temperature limit set forth in TS
Limiting Operating Condition (LOC) 3/
4.7.4 from 100 °F to 104 °F. The CCS
serves as the UHS for the Intake Cooling
Water (ICW) system and provides the
coolant for the Circulating Water (CW)
system. The CW system provides
cooling water to the main plant
condensers, and the ICW system
removes heat loads from the Component
Cooling Water (CCW) system during
normal and accident conditions to
support both reactor and containment
heat removal requirements as well as
spent fuel cooling requirements.
Currently, TS LOC 3/4.7.4 includes a
Surveillance Requirement (SR) that
necessitates the licensee to verify the
UHS (CCS) temperature once every 24hour period and confirm that the
average supply water temperature is
within the 100 °F limit. The proposed
license amendments would modify the
SR to require the licensee to verify the
average supply water temperature to be
within the new TS limit at least once
per 24 hours, and once per hour when
the water temperature exceeds 100 °F.
FPL monitors the UHS (CCS)
temperature at a point in the ICW
system piping going into the inlet of the
CCW Heat Exchangers.
The license amendment would
require the licensee to place both units
in at least hot standby within 12 hours
and cold shutdown within the next 30
hours if the UHS exceeds 104 °F.
The proposed TS revisions would not
result in or require any physical changes
to Turkey Point systems, structures, or
components, including those intended
for the prevention of accidents. If
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
44466
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
approved, the LAR would be effective
from the date of NRC approval through
the expiration dates of the renewed
facility operating licenses (i.e., through
2032 for Unit 3 and 2033 for Unit 4).
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to
provide FPL with additional operational
flexibility during periods when high air
temperatures, low rainfall, and other
factors contribute to conditions
resulting in a UHS temperature in
excess of 100 °F that would otherwise
necessitate FPL to place Turkey Point in
cold shutdown. In its application, FPL
states that loss of load and voltage
control resulting from shutdown during
periods of high summer demand could
result in impacts to grid reliability. UHS
temperatures have recently approached
and exceeded the 100 °F TS limit on
several occasions. On July 20, 2014, the
NRC approved a notice of enforcement
discretion (NOED), which allows the
UHS temperature to exceed 100 °F up to
103 °F for a period of no more than 10
days, as well as several other NOED exit
criteria. The NRC documented the
NOED in a letter to FPL dated July 23,
2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14204A652).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
As part of the original licensing
review for Turkey Point, the AEC
published an FES in July 1972 that
evaluates potential environmental
impacts associated with the operation of
Turkey Point over its initial 40-year
operating period (1972–2012 for Unit 3
and 1973–2013 for Unit 4). In 2002, the
NRC evaluated the environmental
impacts of operating Turkey Point for an
additional 20 years beyond the original
operating license (i.e., through 2032 for
Unit 3 and 2033 for Unit 4) and
predicted that the environmental
impacts of license renewal were small
for all environmental resources.
NUREG–1437, Supplement 5 provides
that assessment. In 2012, the NRC
evaluated the impacts of a thenproposed EPU at Turkey Point that
authorized the facility to increase the
maximum power level from 2300
megawatts thermal (MWt) to 2644 MWt
for each unit. The NRC’s March 2012 EA
and final FONSI provide that
assessment.
As previously discussed, the
proposed action would not result in or
require any physical changes to Turkey
Point systems, structures, or
components, including those intended
for the prevention of accidents. Further,
the proposed license amendments
involve TS changes that would only
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
result in changes in procedural and
operational aspects undertaken by FPL
personnel for monitoring and
maintaining the UHS temperature limit
as measured at the ICW system piping
going into the inlet of the CCW Heat
Exchangers. Thus, FPL’s workforce
would not change, and the regular
operations workforce would otherwise
be unaffected by the proposed action.
Based on the above and the available
information reviewed by the staff, the
NRC concludes that the proposed action
would result in no significant impact on
land use, visual resources, air quality,
noise, the geologic environment,
groundwater resources, terrestrial
resources, historic and cultural
resources, socioeconomic conditions
including minority and low income
populations (environmental justice), or
waste generation and management
activities. Therefore, this environmental
assessment does not prevent any further
evaluation of the operational impacts on
these environmental resources. The
NRC previously assessed the
environmental impacts of continued
operations of Turkey Point in NUREG–
1437, Supplement 5 and the EA and
final FONSI for the EPU, and
implementation of the proposed license
amendments would not result in any
impacts beyond those already
characterized in these documents.
Accordingly, this environmental
assessment focuses on the
environmental resources that could be
affected by the change in the CCS
thermal limit: Surface water resources,
aquatic resources, and Federallyprotected species and habitats.
Radiological impacts are also addressed.
The details of the NRC staff’s safety
evaluation will be separately provided
in the license amendment package
issued to approve the license
amendment, if granted.
Nonradiological Impacts
Surface Water Resources
The Turkey Point site lies on the
shore of Biscayne Bay. South of the site,
Mangrove Point divides the bay from
Card Sound. Biscayne Bay and Card
Sound are shallow, subtropical
estuarine waters located between the
Atlantic coast mainland and a grouping
of barrier islands that form the
northernmost Florida Keys. The Atlantic
Ocean lies beyond the barrier islands.
The Intracoastal Waterway traverses
Biscayne Bay and Card Sound, and a
barge passage runs from the Intracoastal
Waterway to the non-nuclear units on
the Turkey Point site.
In addition to these offsite waters, the
site includes several manmade surface
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
waters, the most significant of which is
the CCS. The CCS spans a 6,100-ac
(2,500-ha) area (4,370 ac (1,770 ha) of
surface water) spread over a 5-mi by 2mi (8-km by 3.2-km) area. The system
includes 168 mi (270 km) of earthen
canals with an average depth of 2.8 ft
(0.8 km) and contains approximately 4
billion gallons (12,300 acre-feet) of
water. The Turkey Point units (both
nuclear Units 3 and 4 and fossil-fueled
Units 1 and 2) use the CCS like a
radiator and, as previously mentioned,
the CCS serves as the UHS for Units 3
and 4. Heated water discharges into the
CCS at one end, flows through the canal
system, and is withdrawn from the other
end for reuse as cooling water. The
heated discharge effluent is distributed
to 32 feeder canals. Water in the feeder
canals flows south and discharges into
a single collector canal that distributes
water to six return canals. Water in the
return canals flows north to the plant
intake. The entire circuit that water
travels from plant discharge back to
plant intake is 13.2 mi (21.2 km), and
transit time through the system is
approximately 44 hours. Water flows
attributable to Units 3 and 4 amount to
approximately 1.0 million gallons per
minute. Temperature rise across the
plant (from intake to discharge) averages
15 to 30 °F depending on the number of
fossil and nuclear units in operation,
unit load, and various other factors. The
average intake temperature is 2.5 °F
above the average ambient air
temperature. Rainfall, stormwater
runoff, and groundwater exchange
replace evaporative losses.
The Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) has
issued FPL a ‘‘No Discharge’’ National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit (No. FL0001562) to
operate the CCS as an industrial
wastewater facility. Accordingly, the
CCS does not discharge directly to fresh
or marine surface waters. The proposed
action would not require FPL to request
modifications to the NPDES permit
because the plant discharge limits
would not change. Plant discharge
limits are not intake-temperature
limited; rather, they are a function of the
quantity of heat rejected to the CCS
during plant operation.
Under the proposed action, the CCS
could experience temperatures between
100 °F and 104 °F at the TS monitoring
location near the north end of the
system for short durations during
periods of peak summer air
temperatures and low rainfall. Such
conditions may not be experienced at all
depending on site and weather
conditions. Temperature increases
would also increase CCS water
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
evaporation rates and result in higher
salinity levels. This effect would also be
temporary and short in duration because
salinity would again decrease upon
natural freshwater recharge of the
system (i.e., through rainfall, stormwater
runoff, and groundwater exchange). No
other onsite or offsite waters would be
affected by the proposed UHS
temperature limit increase.
Because the proposed action would
only affect the CCS, and the CCS is a
manmade closed cycle cooling system,
the NRC concludes that the proposed
action would not result in significant
impacts to surface water resources.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Aquatic Resources
As determined in the previous
section, the CCS is the only surface
water that would be affected by the
proposed action. Accordingly, this
section only addresses aquatic resources
in the CCS.
The CCS supports a variety of aquatic
species typical of shallow, subtropical
waters, including phytoplankton,
zooplankton, marine algae, rooted
plants, crabs, and estuarine fish.
Because of high water temperatures and
salinity content of the CCS, the resident
fish assemblage is dominated by species
adapted to living in harsh conditions,
such as sheepshead minnow
(Cyprinodon variegatus) and several
Fundulus species. The CCS is ownercontrolled and closed to the public;
thus, fish and other aquatic biota in the
CCS do not carry any commercial or
recreational value.
Because aquatic organisms in the
cooling canal system are unable to travel
to or from Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, or
any other natural water body, changes to
the conditions within the CCS would
not affect any aquatic populations in the
surrounding natural aquatic habitats of
Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, or the
Atlantic Ocean. Therefore, the NRC staff
concludes that the proposed action
would result in no significant impact to
aquatic resources.
Federally Protected Species and
Habitats
The Turkey Point site is home to a
resident population of Federallythreatened American crocodiles
(Crocodylus acutus). Crocodiles
discovered and colonized the Turkey
Point CCS following plant construction
in the 1970s, and the site now hosts
approximately one-third to one-half of
the United States breeding population.
In 1977, the FWS designated an area of
Florida that includes the majority of the
Turkey Point site (including the CCS) as
critical habitat for the species under the
ESA. FPL maintains a crocodile
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
management plan that prescribes how
CCS maintenance procedures shall be
conducted to minimize nest, hatchling,
or adult disturbance. FPL also maintains
a crocodile monitoring program to
document breeding success and survival
on the site.
As a Federal agency, the NRC must
comply with the ESA as part of any
action it authorizes, funds, or carries
out, such as the proposed action
evaluated in this environmental
assessment. Under ESA section 7, the
NRC must consult with the FWS and the
National Marine Fisheries Service, as
appropriate, to ensure that the proposed
agency action is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any
endangered or threatened species or
result in the destruction or adverse
modification of designated critical
habitat. The ESA and the regulations
that implement ESA section 7 (50 CFR
Part 402) describe the consultation
process that Federal agencies must
follow in support of agency actions.
Based on a review of the proposed
action, the NRC staff has determined
that the American crocodile is the only
Federally-listed species that has the
potential to be affected by the proposed
action. Pursuant to ESA section 7, NRC
staff consulted with FWS staff at the
South Florida Ecological Services Office
in Vero Beach, Florida. The NRC staff
prepared a biological assessment
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14206A806)
that considers the potential for the
proposed action to reduce hatchling
survival, alter crocodile growth rates,
and reduce habitat availability and
concludes that the proposed action is
not likely to adversely affect the
American crocodile and would have no
effect on the species’ designated critical
habitat. Based on the NRC staff’s
biological assessment determinations,
the NRC concludes that the proposed
action would have no significant impact
on Federally-protected species or
habitats.
In a July 25, 2014, letter (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14206A800) to FWS,
the NRC requested ESA section 7
consultation.
Radiological Impacts
The proposed action would not result
in or require any physical changes to
Turkey Point systems, structures, or
components, including those intended
for the prevention of accidents because
the proposed license amendments
involve TS changes that would only
result in changes in procedural and
operational aspects undertaken by FPL
personnel for monitoring and
maintaining the increased allowable
UHS temperature limit. Thus, the
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
44467
proposed action would not have a
significant adverse effect on the
probability of an accident occurring or
result in an increased radiological
hazard beyond those analyzed in the
licensee’s Updated Final Safety
Analysis Report. The proposed action
would result in no changes to radiation
levels or the types or quantities of
radioactive effluents (gaseous or liquid)
that affect radiation exposures to
members of the public or plant workers.
No changes or different types of
radiological impacts would be expected
from the proposed action. Therefore, the
radiological impacts of granting the
license amendments would result in no
significant impact on the radiological
environment.
Cumulative Impacts
The Council on Environmental
Quality defines cumulative impacts
under the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA)
as the impact on the environment which
results from the incremental impact of
the action when added to other past,
present, and reasonably foreseeable
future actions regardless of what agency
(Federal or non-Federal) or person
undertakes such other actions (40 CFR
Part 1508.7). For the purposes of this
analysis, past actions are related to the
resource conditions when Turkey Point
was licensed and constructed; present
actions are related to the resource
conditions during current operations;
and future actions are those that are
reasonably foreseeable through the
expiration of Turkey Point’s renewed
facility operating licenses. In the
preceding sections of this EA, the NRC
has determined that the proposed action
has the potential to only affect surface
water resources and aquatic resources in
the CCS and Federally protected species
and habitats (i.e., the site’s resident
population of American crocodiles and
its designated critical habitat). This EA
also addresses radiological impacts of
the proposed action. Accordingly, this
section only addresses the cumulative
impacts that could result from the
proposed action and other actions on
these resources. The proposed action
would have no effect on the remaining
resources (i.e., land use, visual
resources, air quality, noise, the geologic
environment, groundwater resources,
terrestrial resources, historic and
cultural resources, socioeconomic
conditions including minority and low
income populations (environmental
justice), and waste generation and
management activities), and thus,
cumulative impacts would not occur for
these environmental resources.
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
44468
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
The NRC staff has identified several
actions that may contribute to
cumulative effects; each of these actions
is described separately below.
CCS Chemical Treatments
In 2011, FPL began to notice
increased blue green algae
concentrations in the CCS. The
concentrations have steadily increased
since that time. FPL has performed
engineering and environmental analyses
and believes that the presence of higher
than normal CCS algae concentrations
may be diminishing the CCS’s heat
transfer capabilities. FPL developed a
plan to gradually reduce algae
concentrations through controlled
chemical treatment of the CCS over the
course of several weeks. On June 18,
2014, FPL submitted a request to the
FDEP to approve the use of copper
sulfate, hydrogen peroxide, and a biostimulant to treat the algae (letter
contained in Appendix A of ADAMS
Accession No. ML14206A806). On June
27, 2014, the FDEP approved FPL’s
treatment plan for a 90-day trial period
(letter contained in Appendix A of
ADAMS Accession No. ML14206A806).
The FDEP requested that during the 90day treatment period, FPL monitor the
CCS for total recoverable copper and
dissolved oxygen and submit its results
to the FDEP. The FDEP also
recommended that FPL coordinate with
the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC) due to
the presence of crocodiles in the cooling
system. The FWC provided its
comments on FPL’s treatment plan in a
letter dated July 1, 2014 (letter
contained in Appendix A of ADAMS
Accession No. ML14206A806).
The CCS chemical treatments have
the potential to contribute to cumulative
effects on CCS surface water resources,
CCS aquatic resources, and the
American crocodile. Because the CCS is
a manmade closed cycle cooling system,
treatment of the CCS is not likely to
have a significant cumulative effect on
surface water resources. Monitoring
required by the FDEP will ensure
adequate water quality throughout and
following treatment. Monitoring will
also ensure that any unanticipated
effects on the aquatic organisms that
inhabit the CCS are appropriately
addressed. During the treatment period,
FPL has agreed to report any potentially
related fish kills in the CCS to the FWC.
No fish kills have been reported to date.
Regarding crocodiles, the NRC’s July 25,
2014, biological assessment notes that
FPL has not observed any behavioral or
distributional changes or any other
noticeable differences that would
indicate effects to crocodiles resulting
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
from either the presence of higher algae
concentrations or the recent chemical
treatments.
Aquifer Withdrawals
The CCS is situated above two
aquifers: the shallower saltwater
Biscayne Aquifer and the deeper
brackish Floridan Aquifer. A confining
layer separates the two aquifers from
one another. Turkey Point, Unit 5 uses
the Floridan Aquifer for cooling water.
The South Florida Water Management
District (SFWMD) recently granted FPL
approval to withdraw a portion
(approximately 5 million gallons per
day [MGD]) of the Unit 5 withdrawal
allowance for use in the CCS. FPL began
pumping Floridan Aquifer water into
the CCS in early July. FPL has also
received temporary approval to
withdraw 30 MGD from the Biscayne
Aquifer, though FPL has not yet used
this allowance.
FPL also anticipates the FDEP to issue
an Administrative Order requiring FPL
to install up to six new wells that will
pump approximately 14 MGD of water
from the Floridan Aquifer into the CCS.
Modeling performed by FPL consultants
and the SFWMD indicates that in
approximately 2 years, the withdrawals
would reduce the salinity of the CCS to
the equivalent of Biscayne Bay (about 34
parts per thousand [ppt]). Such
withdrawals could also help moderate
water temperatures.
The current and anticipated future
aquifer withdrawals have the potential
to contribute to cumulative effects on
CCS surface water resources, CCS
aquatic resources, and crocodiles.
Because the CCS is a manmade closed
cycle cooling system, aquifer
withdrawals are not likely to have a
significant cumulative effect on surface
water resources. Aquifer withdrawals
would result in beneficial impacts to
CCS aquatic resources and the
crocodiles inhabiting the Turkey Point
site. FPL anticipates that the
withdrawals will reduce the salinity of
the CCS to about 34 ppt and could also
help moderate CCS temperatures over
the long term. Both of these effects
would create favorable conditions for
CCS aquatic biota and crocodiles, which
are currently tolerating an unusually
hot, hypersaline environment.
Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7
Construction and Operation
In June 2009, FPL submitted a
combined license application (COLA)
(ADAMS Accession No. ML091830589)
to construct and operate two
Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000
(AP1000) pressurized-water reactors
designated as Turkey Point, Units 6 and
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7. Submission of the COLA does not
commit FPL to build two new nuclear
units and does not constitute approval
of the proposal by the NRC; however,
submission of the COLA infers that the
construction and operation of the new
units is a reasonably foreseeable future
action. The COLA will be evaluated on
its merits, and the NRC will decide
whether to grant the licenses after
considering and evaluating the
environmental and safety implications
of the proposal. Environmental impacts
of constructing and operating Turkey
Point, Units 6 and 7 will depend on
their actual design characteristics,
construction practices, and power plant
operations. These impacts will be
assessed by the NRC in a separate NEPA
document. The cumulative impacts
presented in this EA may differ from
those impacts assessed for the COLA.
Potential impacts presented below have
been drawn from FPL’s Turkey Point,
Units 6 and 7 Environmental Report,
Revision 5 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML13357A435), and NRC’s 2012 EA and
final FONSI for the EPU.
Of the environmental resources
affected by the proposed action, the
possible construction and operation of
Units 6 and 7 only have the potential to
contribute to cumulative radiological
impacts. Units 6 and 7 would not use
the CCS for cooling. Rather, Units 6 and
7 would have a closed-cycle cooling
system with mechanical draft cooling
towers. The cooling towers would draw
makeup from Miami-Dade Water and
Sewer Department reclaimed water and
would discharge blowdown into deep
injection wells. Saltwater extracted from
Biscayne Bay subsurface sediment
through radial collector wells proposed
to be built on the Turkey Point site
would serve as a secondary source of
makeup water when a sufficient
quantity and/or quality of reclaimed
water is not available. Because Units 6
and 7 would not use the CCS, the
proposed new units would not have a
cumulative effect on CCS surface water
resources or CCS aquatic resources.
Regarding crocodiles, potential
impacts to this species and its critical
habitat will be addressed in a future
ESA section 7 consultation between the
NRC and FWS. When considering
cumulative impacts on Federally listed
species, the ESA’s implementing
regulations direct Federal agencies to
consider the effects of future State or
private activities, not involving Federal
activities, that are reasonably certain to
occur within the action area of the
Federal action subject to consultation
(50 CFR part 402.02; emphasis added).
Accordingly, the NRC will not address
cumulative impacts of Units 6 and 7 on
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
the American crocodile in this EA
because the NRC’s issuance of a license
to construct and operate Units 6 and 7
is a separate Federal activity that will
require future consultation.
Regarding cumulative radiological
impacts, the NRC and Environmental
Protection Agency have developed
radiological dose limits for protection of
the public and workers that address the
cumulative effects of acute and longterm exposure to radiation and
radioactive material. These dose limits
are specified in 10 CFR part 20 and 40
CFR part 190.
The cumulative radiation dose to the
public and workers is required to be
within the regulations cited above. The
public dose limit of 25 millirem (0.25
millisieverts) in 40 CFR part 190 applies
to all reactors that may be on a site and
also includes any other nearby nuclear
power reactor facilities. The NRC staff
reviewed several years of radiation dose
data contained in the licensee’s annual
radioactive effluent release reports for
Turkey Point, and the data demonstrate
that the dose to members of the public
from radioactive effluents is within the
limits of 10 CFR part 20 and 40 CFR part
190. As previously indicated in the
‘‘Radiological Impacts’’ section of this
environmental assessment, the proposed
action would result in no changes to
radiation levels or the types or
quantities of radioactive effluents
(gaseous or liquid) that affect radiation
exposures to plant workers and
members of the public.
FPL’s COLA for Units 6 and 7
contains an assessment of the radiation
doses to members of the public from the
proposed new reactors and concludes
that doses would be within regulatory
limits. The staff expects continued
compliance with regulatory dose limits
during operation of Turkey Point, Units
3 and 4 under the proposed action.
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that
the cumulative radiological impacts to
members of the public that could result
from the combined operations of Turkey
Point, Units 3 and 4 and the proposed
new Units 6 and 7 would result in no
significant impact on the environment.
Regarding radiation dose to workers,
cumulative dose would only be
applicable for those workers that would
be engaged at both facilities (i.e., the
currently operating Units 3 and 4 and
proposed new Units 6 and 7). For Units
3 and 4, the licensee has a radiation
protection program that maintains
worker doses within the dose limits in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:56 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
10 CFR part 20 during all phases of
operations. Operation of Units 6 and 7
would require a similar radiation
protection program, and the licensee
would be responsible for ensuring that
workers are not exposed to dose limits
above those specified in 10 CFR part 20.
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that
the cumulative radiological impacts to
plant workers that could result from the
combined operations of Turkey Point,
Units 3 and 4 and the proposed new
Units 6 and 7 would result in no
significant impact on the radiological
environment.
Cumulative Impacts Conclusion
The NRC staff considered the
cumulative impacts of CCS chemical
treatments, current and anticipated
future aquifer withdrawals, and the
possible future construction and
operation of two new nuclear units on
the Turkey Point site. Based on the
information presented in this section,
the NRC staff concludes that the
proposed action, in combination with
other cumulative actions, would result
in no significant cumulative impacts on
the environment.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
action, the NRC staff considered denial
of the proposed license amendments
(i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ alternative). Denial
of the application would result in no
change in current environmental
conditions or impacts. However, denial
would result in reduced operational
flexibility and could require FPL to
derate or shutdown Turkey Point if the
UHS average supply water temperature
approaches or exceeds the 100 °F TS
limit. In its application, FPL states that
loss of load and voltage control resulting
from such a shutdown during periods of
high summer demand could result in
impacts to grid reliability.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of
any different resources than those
previously considered in NUREG–1437,
Supplement 5 prepared for license
renewal of Turkey Point.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On July 28, 2014, the NRC staff
notified the Florida State official, Ms.
Cindy Becker, Chief of Bureau of
Radiation Control, of the Florida
Department of Health, regarding the
environmental impacts of the proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00087
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
44469
action. The State official had no
comments.
The NRC staff also coordinated with
the FWS pursuant to consultation under
ESA section 7 during the staff’s review
of the proposed action. The consultation
is further discussed under the
‘‘Federally-Protected Species’’ section of
this environmental assessment.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC is considering issuing
amendments for Renewed Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–31 and
DPR–41, issued to FPL for operation of
Turkey Point to increase the UHS water
temperature limit specified in the
Turkey Point TSs from 100 °F to 104 °F
and add an SR to monitor the UHS
temperature more frequently if the UHS
temperature approaches the new limit.
On the basis of the EA included in
Section II above and incorporated by
reference in this finding, the NRC
concludes that the proposed action
would not have significant effects on the
quality of the human environment. The
proposed action would result in no
significant impacts on surface water
resources, aquatic resources, or the
radiological environment. In addition,
the proposed action is not likely to
adversely affect any Federally-protected
species or affect any designated critical
habitat. The proposed action would also
not result in significant cumulative
impacts on any environmental
resources. The NRC’s evaluation
considered information provided in the
licensee’s application and associated
supplements; the NRC’s staff
independent review of other
environmental documents, and
coordination with the FWS pursuant to
consultation under ESA section 7.
Section IV below lists the
environmental documents related to the
proposed action and includes
information on the availability of these
documents. Based on its findings, the
NRC has decided not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
IV. Availability of Documents
The following table identifies the
environmental and other documents
cited in this document and related to
the NRC’s FONSI. These documents are
available for public inspection online
through ADAMS at https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html or in person at
the NRC’s PDR as described previously.
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
44470
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 147 / Thursday, July 31, 2014 / Notices
Adams
Accession No.
Document
Documents Related to License Amendment Request
Florida Power & Light Company. License Amendment Request No. 231, Application to Revise Technical Specifications to Revise Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature Limit. Dated July 10, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. License Amendment Request No. 231, Application to Revise Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature Limit—Request for Emergency Approval. Dated July 17, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Turkey Point 3 and 4 Request for Additional Information—LAR231 (TAC MF4392 and
MF4393). [1 of 2] Dated July 18, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Turkey Point 3 and 4 Request for Additional Information—LAR231 (TAC MF4392 and
MF4393). [2 of 2] Dated July 18, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. License Amendment Request No. 231, Application to Revise Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature Limit—Supplement 1, and Response to Request for Additional Information. Dated July 22, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding License Amendment Request No.
231, Application to Revise Technical Specifications to Revise Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature Limit. Dated July 22, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Turkey Point 3 and 4 Request for Additional Information—LAR231 (TAC MF4392 and
MF4393). Dated July 22, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Notice of Enforcement Discretion for Florida Power & Light Company Regarding Turkey
Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 [NOED NO. 14–2–001]. Dated July 23, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. Response to Containment and Ventilation Branch Request for Additional Information, Regarding License Amendment Request No. 231, Application to Revise Ultimate Heat Temperature Limit. Dated July 24, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4—Individual Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendments to Renewed Facility Operating Licenses, Proposed No Significant Hazards Consideration Determination, and Opportunity for Hearing (Exigent Circumstances) (TAC Nos. MF4392 and MF4293). Dated July 24, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Request to Reinitiate Informal Consultation for a Proposed License Amendment to Increase the Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature Limit at Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4. Dated July 25,
2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Biological Assessment on the American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) for Turkey Point
Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4 Proposed License Amendment to Increase the Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature
Limit. Dated July 25, 2014.
ML14196A006
ML14202A392
ML14203A614
ML14203A618
ML14204A367
ML14204A368
ML14204A814
ML14204A652
ML14206A853
ML14204A129
(letter)
ML14199A111
(enclosure)
ML14206A800
ML14206A806
Other Referenced Documents
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Regarding Turkey Point Units 3 and 4—Final Report (NUREG–1437, Supplement 5). Dated January 28, 2002.
Florida Power & Light Company. Proposed Turkey Point Units 6 & 7, Project No. 763, Application for Combined License for
Turkey Point Units 6 and 7. Dated June 30, 2009.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to a License Amendment To Increase the Maximum Reactor Power Level, Florida Power & Light Company; Turkey Point, Units 3
and 4. Dated March 27, 2012.
Florida Power & Light Company. Turkey Point Units 6 & 7 Combine License Application, Part 3: Environmental Report, Revision 5. Dated December 23, 2013.
Florida Power & Light Company. Turkey Point Units 3 and 4; Wastewater Permit FL0001563; Request for Approval for the
Use of Copper Sulfate, Hydrogen Peroxide, and a Bio-Stimulant in the Treatment and Control of Blue Green Algae in the
Cooling Canal System. Dated June 18, 2014.
Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Re: Florida Power & Light, Turkey Point, NPDES Permit FL0001562, 90-Day
Trial Approval. Dated June 27, 2014.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. Re: Florida Power & Light, Turkey Point Plant Maintenance Activity,
NPDES Permit FL0001562, Miami-Dade County. Dated July 1, 2014.
* (See Appendix A.)
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day
of July 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lisa M. Regner,
Acting Chief, Plant Licensing Branch II–2,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014–18159 Filed 7–30–14; 8:45 am]
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:51 Jul 30, 2014
Jkt 232001
PO 00000
Frm 00088
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\31JYN1.SGM
31JYN1
ML020280236
ML091830589
ML12074A251
ML13357A435
ML14206A806 *
ML14206A806 *
ML14206A806 *
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 147 (Thursday, July 31, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44464-44470]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-18159]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251; NRC-2014-0181]
Florida Power & Light Company; Turkey Point Nuclear Generating
Unit Nos. 3 and 4
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and final finding of no significant
impact; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of amendments to Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-
31 and DPR-41 issued to Florida Power & Light Company (FPL, the
licensee) for operation of Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3
and 4 (Turkey Point) located in Homestead, Miami-Dade County, Florida.
The proposed amendments would increase the ultimate heat sink (UHS)
water temperature limit specified in the Turkey Point Technical
Specifications (TSs) from 100 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F) to
104[emsp14][deg]F and add a surveillance requirement to monitor the UHS
temperature more frequently if the UHS temperature approaches the new
limit. The NRC did not identify any significant environmental impacts
associated with the proposed license amendments based on its evaluation
of the information provided in the licensee's application and other
available information. Accordingly, the NRC has prepared this
Environmental Assessment (EA) and Final Finding of No Significant
Impact (FONSI) for the proposed license amendments.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2014-0181 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may access publicly available
[[Page 44465]]
information related to this document using any of the following
methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2011-0181. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-287-
3422; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the NRC
Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this notice (if
that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a
document is referenced. For the convenience of the reader, the ADAMS
accession numbers are also provided in a table in the ``Availability of
Documents'' section of this document.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Audrey L. Klett, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-0489; email: Audrey.Klett@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering issuance of amendments to Renewed Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41 issued to FPL for operation of
Turkey Point, located in Homestead, Miami-Dade County, Florida. As
required by Sec. 51.21 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR Part 51.21), the NRC staff performed an EA to document its
findings related to the proposed license amendments. FPL submitted its
license amendment request by letter dated July 10, 2014 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14196A006) and subsequently supplemented its
application by letters dated July 17, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14202A392), July 22, 2014 (ADAMS Accession Nos. ML14204A367 and
ML14204A368), and July 24, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14206A853).
Based on information provided in FPL's application and associated
supplements, the NRC staff's independent review, and the NRC's
consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) pursuant to
section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), the
NRC did not identify any significant environmental impacts associated
with the proposed license amendments.
Based on the results of the EA documented herein, the NRC is
issuing this final FONSI, in accordance with 10 CFR 51.32, for the
proposed license amendments.
II. Environmental Assessment
Plant Site and Environs
The Turkey Point site encompasses 11,000 acres (ac) (4,450 hectares
(ha)) in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The site lies 25 miles (mi) (40
kilometers [km]) south of Miami, Florida, and the nearest city limits
are Florida City, which lies 8 mi (13 km) to the west, Homestead, which
lies 4.5 mi (7 km) to the northwest, and Key Largo, which lies 10 mi
(16 km) south of the Turkey Point site. The Turkey Point site is
bordered to the east by Biscayne National Park, to the north by
Homestead Bayfront Park and a portion of Biscayne National Park, and on
the west and south by FPL's 13,000-ac (5,260-ha) Everglades Mitigation
Bank. The Turkey Point site includes five electric generating units.
Units 1, 2, and 5 are fossil-fueled generating units and are not
covered by the proposed licensing action; Units 3 and 4 are nuclear
generating units. Each nuclear reactor is a Westinghouse pressurized
light-water reactor that generates electricity via three steam
generators that produce steam that turns turbines. The site features a
6,100-ac (2,500-ha) closed cooling canal system (CCS) that cools heated
water discharged by Units 1 through 4. Unit 5 uses mechanical draft
cooling towers for cooling, draws makeup water from the Upper Floridan
Aquifer, and discharges blowdown to the CCS. The five units and
supporting equipment (excluding the CCS) occupy approximately 130 ac
(53 ha).
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), the NRC's predecessor
agency, and the NRC have previously conducted environmental reviews of
Turkey Point in several documents, and the descriptions therein
continue to accurately depict the Turkey Point site and environs. Those
documents include the AEC's July 1972 Final Environmental Statement
(FES); the NRC's January 2002 Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Regarding Turkey Point Units 3
and 4--Final Report (NUREG-1437, Supplement 5) (ADAMS Accession No.
ML020280236); and the NRC's March 2012 environmental assessment and
final FONSI for the Turkey Point extended power uprate (EPU) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML12074A251).
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would increase the UHS water temperature limit
specified in the Turkey Point TSs and add a surveillance requirement to
monitor the UHS temperature more frequently if the UHS temperature
approaches the new limit. The proposed action is in accordance with the
licensee's application dated July 10, 2014, as supplemented by letters
dated July 17, July 22 (two letters), and July 24, 2014.
More specifically, the proposed action would amend Appendix A of
Turkey Point's Renewed Facility Operating Licenses in order to revise
the UHS temperature limit set forth in TS Limiting Operating Condition
(LOC) 3/4.7.4 from 100 [deg]F to 104 [deg]F. The CCS serves as the UHS
for the Intake Cooling Water (ICW) system and provides the coolant for
the Circulating Water (CW) system. The CW system provides cooling water
to the main plant condensers, and the ICW system removes heat loads
from the Component Cooling Water (CCW) system during normal and
accident conditions to support both reactor and containment heat
removal requirements as well as spent fuel cooling requirements.
Currently, TS LOC 3/4.7.4 includes a Surveillance Requirement (SR)
that necessitates the licensee to verify the UHS (CCS) temperature once
every 24-hour period and confirm that the average supply water
temperature is within the 100 [deg]F limit. The proposed license
amendments would modify the SR to require the licensee to verify the
average supply water temperature to be within the new TS limit at least
once per 24 hours, and once per hour when the water temperature exceeds
100 [deg]F. FPL monitors the UHS (CCS) temperature at a point in the
ICW system piping going into the inlet of the CCW Heat Exchangers.
The license amendment would require the licensee to place both
units in at least hot standby within 12 hours and cold shutdown within
the next 30 hours if the UHS exceeds 104 [deg]F.
The proposed TS revisions would not result in or require any
physical changes to Turkey Point systems, structures, or components,
including those intended for the prevention of accidents. If
[[Page 44466]]
approved, the LAR would be effective from the date of NRC approval
through the expiration dates of the renewed facility operating licenses
(i.e., through 2032 for Unit 3 and 2033 for Unit 4).
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to provide FPL with additional
operational flexibility during periods when high air temperatures, low
rainfall, and other factors contribute to conditions resulting in a UHS
temperature in excess of 100 [deg]F that would otherwise necessitate
FPL to place Turkey Point in cold shutdown. In its application, FPL
states that loss of load and voltage control resulting from shutdown
during periods of high summer demand could result in impacts to grid
reliability. UHS temperatures have recently approached and exceeded the
100 [deg]F TS limit on several occasions. On July 20, 2014, the NRC
approved a notice of enforcement discretion (NOED), which allows the
UHS temperature to exceed 100 [deg]F up to 103 [deg]F for a period of
no more than 10 days, as well as several other NOED exit criteria. The
NRC documented the NOED in a letter to FPL dated July 23, 2014 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML14204A652).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
As part of the original licensing review for Turkey Point, the AEC
published an FES in July 1972 that evaluates potential environmental
impacts associated with the operation of Turkey Point over its initial
40-year operating period (1972-2012 for Unit 3 and 1973-2013 for Unit
4). In 2002, the NRC evaluated the environmental impacts of operating
Turkey Point for an additional 20 years beyond the original operating
license (i.e., through 2032 for Unit 3 and 2033 for Unit 4) and
predicted that the environmental impacts of license renewal were small
for all environmental resources. NUREG-1437, Supplement 5 provides that
assessment. In 2012, the NRC evaluated the impacts of a then-proposed
EPU at Turkey Point that authorized the facility to increase the
maximum power level from 2300 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 2644 MWt for
each unit. The NRC's March 2012 EA and final FONSI provide that
assessment.
As previously discussed, the proposed action would not result in or
require any physical changes to Turkey Point systems, structures, or
components, including those intended for the prevention of accidents.
Further, the proposed license amendments involve TS changes that would
only result in changes in procedural and operational aspects undertaken
by FPL personnel for monitoring and maintaining the UHS temperature
limit as measured at the ICW system piping going into the inlet of the
CCW Heat Exchangers. Thus, FPL's workforce would not change, and the
regular operations workforce would otherwise be unaffected by the
proposed action. Based on the above and the available information
reviewed by the staff, the NRC concludes that the proposed action would
result in no significant impact on land use, visual resources, air
quality, noise, the geologic environment, groundwater resources,
terrestrial resources, historic and cultural resources, socioeconomic
conditions including minority and low income populations (environmental
justice), or waste generation and management activities. Therefore,
this environmental assessment does not prevent any further evaluation
of the operational impacts on these environmental resources. The NRC
previously assessed the environmental impacts of continued operations
of Turkey Point in NUREG-1437, Supplement 5 and the EA and final FONSI
for the EPU, and implementation of the proposed license amendments
would not result in any impacts beyond those already characterized in
these documents. Accordingly, this environmental assessment focuses on
the environmental resources that could be affected by the change in the
CCS thermal limit: Surface water resources, aquatic resources, and
Federally-protected species and habitats. Radiological impacts are also
addressed.
The details of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be separately
provided in the license amendment package issued to approve the license
amendment, if granted.
Nonradiological Impacts
Surface Water Resources
The Turkey Point site lies on the shore of Biscayne Bay. South of
the site, Mangrove Point divides the bay from Card Sound. Biscayne Bay
and Card Sound are shallow, subtropical estuarine waters located
between the Atlantic coast mainland and a grouping of barrier islands
that form the northernmost Florida Keys. The Atlantic Ocean lies beyond
the barrier islands. The Intracoastal Waterway traverses Biscayne Bay
and Card Sound, and a barge passage runs from the Intracoastal Waterway
to the non-nuclear units on the Turkey Point site.
In addition to these offsite waters, the site includes several
manmade surface waters, the most significant of which is the CCS. The
CCS spans a 6,100-ac (2,500-ha) area (4,370 ac (1,770 ha) of surface
water) spread over a 5-mi by 2-mi (8-km by 3.2-km) area. The system
includes 168 mi (270 km) of earthen canals with an average depth of 2.8
ft (0.8 km) and contains approximately 4 billion gallons (12,300 acre-
feet) of water. The Turkey Point units (both nuclear Units 3 and 4 and
fossil-fueled Units 1 and 2) use the CCS like a radiator and, as
previously mentioned, the CCS serves as the UHS for Units 3 and 4.
Heated water discharges into the CCS at one end, flows through the
canal system, and is withdrawn from the other end for reuse as cooling
water. The heated discharge effluent is distributed to 32 feeder
canals. Water in the feeder canals flows south and discharges into a
single collector canal that distributes water to six return canals.
Water in the return canals flows north to the plant intake. The entire
circuit that water travels from plant discharge back to plant intake is
13.2 mi (21.2 km), and transit time through the system is approximately
44 hours. Water flows attributable to Units 3 and 4 amount to
approximately 1.0 million gallons per minute. Temperature rise across
the plant (from intake to discharge) averages 15 to 30 [deg]F depending
on the number of fossil and nuclear units in operation, unit load, and
various other factors. The average intake temperature is 2.5 [deg]F
above the average ambient air temperature. Rainfall, stormwater runoff,
and groundwater exchange replace evaporative losses.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has
issued FPL a ``No Discharge'' National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit (No. FL0001562) to operate the CCS as an
industrial wastewater facility. Accordingly, the CCS does not discharge
directly to fresh or marine surface waters. The proposed action would
not require FPL to request modifications to the NPDES permit because
the plant discharge limits would not change. Plant discharge limits are
not intake-temperature limited; rather, they are a function of the
quantity of heat rejected to the CCS during plant operation.
Under the proposed action, the CCS could experience temperatures
between 100 [deg]F and 104 [deg]F at the TS monitoring location near
the north end of the system for short durations during periods of peak
summer air temperatures and low rainfall. Such conditions may not be
experienced at all depending on site and weather conditions.
Temperature increases would also increase CCS water
[[Page 44467]]
evaporation rates and result in higher salinity levels. This effect
would also be temporary and short in duration because salinity would
again decrease upon natural freshwater recharge of the system (i.e.,
through rainfall, stormwater runoff, and groundwater exchange). No
other onsite or offsite waters would be affected by the proposed UHS
temperature limit increase.
Because the proposed action would only affect the CCS, and the CCS
is a manmade closed cycle cooling system, the NRC concludes that the
proposed action would not result in significant impacts to surface
water resources.
Aquatic Resources
As determined in the previous section, the CCS is the only surface
water that would be affected by the proposed action. Accordingly, this
section only addresses aquatic resources in the CCS.
The CCS supports a variety of aquatic species typical of shallow,
subtropical waters, including phytoplankton, zooplankton, marine algae,
rooted plants, crabs, and estuarine fish. Because of high water
temperatures and salinity content of the CCS, the resident fish
assemblage is dominated by species adapted to living in harsh
conditions, such as sheepshead minnow (Cyprinodon variegatus) and
several Fundulus species. The CCS is owner-controlled and closed to the
public; thus, fish and other aquatic biota in the CCS do not carry any
commercial or recreational value.
Because aquatic organisms in the cooling canal system are unable to
travel to or from Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, or any other natural water
body, changes to the conditions within the CCS would not affect any
aquatic populations in the surrounding natural aquatic habitats of
Biscayne Bay, Card Sound, or the Atlantic Ocean. Therefore, the NRC
staff concludes that the proposed action would result in no significant
impact to aquatic resources.
Federally Protected Species and Habitats
The Turkey Point site is home to a resident population of
Federally-threatened American crocodiles (Crocodylus acutus).
Crocodiles discovered and colonized the Turkey Point CCS following
plant construction in the 1970s, and the site now hosts approximately
one-third to one-half of the United States breeding population. In
1977, the FWS designated an area of Florida that includes the majority
of the Turkey Point site (including the CCS) as critical habitat for
the species under the ESA. FPL maintains a crocodile management plan
that prescribes how CCS maintenance procedures shall be conducted to
minimize nest, hatchling, or adult disturbance. FPL also maintains a
crocodile monitoring program to document breeding success and survival
on the site.
As a Federal agency, the NRC must comply with the ESA as part of
any action it authorizes, funds, or carries out, such as the proposed
action evaluated in this environmental assessment. Under ESA section 7,
the NRC must consult with the FWS and the National Marine Fisheries
Service, as appropriate, to ensure that the proposed agency action is
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or
threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification
of designated critical habitat. The ESA and the regulations that
implement ESA section 7 (50 CFR Part 402) describe the consultation
process that Federal agencies must follow in support of agency actions.
Based on a review of the proposed action, the NRC staff has
determined that the American crocodile is the only Federally-listed
species that has the potential to be affected by the proposed action.
Pursuant to ESA section 7, NRC staff consulted with FWS staff at the
South Florida Ecological Services Office in Vero Beach, Florida. The
NRC staff prepared a biological assessment (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14206A806) that considers the potential for the proposed action to
reduce hatchling survival, alter crocodile growth rates, and reduce
habitat availability and concludes that the proposed action is not
likely to adversely affect the American crocodile and would have no
effect on the species' designated critical habitat. Based on the NRC
staff's biological assessment determinations, the NRC concludes that
the proposed action would have no significant impact on Federally-
protected species or habitats.
In a July 25, 2014, letter (ADAMS Accession No. ML14206A800) to
FWS, the NRC requested ESA section 7 consultation.
Radiological Impacts
The proposed action would not result in or require any physical
changes to Turkey Point systems, structures, or components, including
those intended for the prevention of accidents because the proposed
license amendments involve TS changes that would only result in changes
in procedural and operational aspects undertaken by FPL personnel for
monitoring and maintaining the increased allowable UHS temperature
limit. Thus, the proposed action would not have a significant adverse
effect on the probability of an accident occurring or result in an
increased radiological hazard beyond those analyzed in the licensee's
Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. The proposed action would result
in no changes to radiation levels or the types or quantities of
radioactive effluents (gaseous or liquid) that affect radiation
exposures to members of the public or plant workers. No changes or
different types of radiological impacts would be expected from the
proposed action. Therefore, the radiological impacts of granting the
license amendments would result in no significant impact on the
radiological environment.
Cumulative Impacts
The Council on Environmental Quality defines cumulative impacts
under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA)
as the impact on the environment which results from the incremental
impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-
Federal) or person undertakes such other actions (40 CFR Part 1508.7).
For the purposes of this analysis, past actions are related to the
resource conditions when Turkey Point was licensed and constructed;
present actions are related to the resource conditions during current
operations; and future actions are those that are reasonably
foreseeable through the expiration of Turkey Point's renewed facility
operating licenses. In the preceding sections of this EA, the NRC has
determined that the proposed action has the potential to only affect
surface water resources and aquatic resources in the CCS and Federally
protected species and habitats (i.e., the site's resident population of
American crocodiles and its designated critical habitat). This EA also
addresses radiological impacts of the proposed action. Accordingly,
this section only addresses the cumulative impacts that could result
from the proposed action and other actions on these resources. The
proposed action would have no effect on the remaining resources (i.e.,
land use, visual resources, air quality, noise, the geologic
environment, groundwater resources, terrestrial resources, historic and
cultural resources, socioeconomic conditions including minority and low
income populations (environmental justice), and waste generation and
management activities), and thus, cumulative impacts would not occur
for these environmental resources.
[[Page 44468]]
The NRC staff has identified several actions that may contribute to
cumulative effects; each of these actions is described separately
below.
CCS Chemical Treatments
In 2011, FPL began to notice increased blue green algae
concentrations in the CCS. The concentrations have steadily increased
since that time. FPL has performed engineering and environmental
analyses and believes that the presence of higher than normal CCS algae
concentrations may be diminishing the CCS's heat transfer capabilities.
FPL developed a plan to gradually reduce algae concentrations through
controlled chemical treatment of the CCS over the course of several
weeks. On June 18, 2014, FPL submitted a request to the FDEP to approve
the use of copper sulfate, hydrogen peroxide, and a bio-stimulant to
treat the algae (letter contained in Appendix A of ADAMS Accession No.
ML14206A806). On June 27, 2014, the FDEP approved FPL's treatment plan
for a 90-day trial period (letter contained in Appendix A of ADAMS
Accession No. ML14206A806). The FDEP requested that during the 90-day
treatment period, FPL monitor the CCS for total recoverable copper and
dissolved oxygen and submit its results to the FDEP. The FDEP also
recommended that FPL coordinate with the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC) due to the presence of crocodiles in the
cooling system. The FWC provided its comments on FPL's treatment plan
in a letter dated July 1, 2014 (letter contained in Appendix A of ADAMS
Accession No. ML14206A806).
The CCS chemical treatments have the potential to contribute to
cumulative effects on CCS surface water resources, CCS aquatic
resources, and the American crocodile. Because the CCS is a manmade
closed cycle cooling system, treatment of the CCS is not likely to have
a significant cumulative effect on surface water resources. Monitoring
required by the FDEP will ensure adequate water quality throughout and
following treatment. Monitoring will also ensure that any unanticipated
effects on the aquatic organisms that inhabit the CCS are appropriately
addressed. During the treatment period, FPL has agreed to report any
potentially related fish kills in the CCS to the FWC. No fish kills
have been reported to date. Regarding crocodiles, the NRC's July 25,
2014, biological assessment notes that FPL has not observed any
behavioral or distributional changes or any other noticeable
differences that would indicate effects to crocodiles resulting from
either the presence of higher algae concentrations or the recent
chemical treatments.
Aquifer Withdrawals
The CCS is situated above two aquifers: the shallower saltwater
Biscayne Aquifer and the deeper brackish Floridan Aquifer. A confining
layer separates the two aquifers from one another. Turkey Point, Unit 5
uses the Floridan Aquifer for cooling water. The South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD) recently granted FPL approval to withdraw a
portion (approximately 5 million gallons per day [MGD]) of the Unit 5
withdrawal allowance for use in the CCS. FPL began pumping Floridan
Aquifer water into the CCS in early July. FPL has also received
temporary approval to withdraw 30 MGD from the Biscayne Aquifer, though
FPL has not yet used this allowance.
FPL also anticipates the FDEP to issue an Administrative Order
requiring FPL to install up to six new wells that will pump
approximately 14 MGD of water from the Floridan Aquifer into the CCS.
Modeling performed by FPL consultants and the SFWMD indicates that in
approximately 2 years, the withdrawals would reduce the salinity of the
CCS to the equivalent of Biscayne Bay (about 34 parts per thousand
[ppt]). Such withdrawals could also help moderate water temperatures.
The current and anticipated future aquifer withdrawals have the
potential to contribute to cumulative effects on CCS surface water
resources, CCS aquatic resources, and crocodiles. Because the CCS is a
manmade closed cycle cooling system, aquifer withdrawals are not likely
to have a significant cumulative effect on surface water resources.
Aquifer withdrawals would result in beneficial impacts to CCS aquatic
resources and the crocodiles inhabiting the Turkey Point site. FPL
anticipates that the withdrawals will reduce the salinity of the CCS to
about 34 ppt and could also help moderate CCS temperatures over the
long term. Both of these effects would create favorable conditions for
CCS aquatic biota and crocodiles, which are currently tolerating an
unusually hot, hypersaline environment.
Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7 Construction and Operation
In June 2009, FPL submitted a combined license application (COLA)
(ADAMS Accession No. ML091830589) to construct and operate two
Westinghouse Advanced Passive 1000 (AP1000) pressurized-water reactors
designated as Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7. Submission of the COLA does
not commit FPL to build two new nuclear units and does not constitute
approval of the proposal by the NRC; however, submission of the COLA
infers that the construction and operation of the new units is a
reasonably foreseeable future action. The COLA will be evaluated on its
merits, and the NRC will decide whether to grant the licenses after
considering and evaluating the environmental and safety implications of
the proposal. Environmental impacts of constructing and operating
Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7 will depend on their actual design
characteristics, construction practices, and power plant operations.
These impacts will be assessed by the NRC in a separate NEPA document.
The cumulative impacts presented in this EA may differ from those
impacts assessed for the COLA. Potential impacts presented below have
been drawn from FPL's Turkey Point, Units 6 and 7 Environmental Report,
Revision 5 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13357A435), and NRC's 2012 EA and
final FONSI for the EPU.
Of the environmental resources affected by the proposed action, the
possible construction and operation of Units 6 and 7 only have the
potential to contribute to cumulative radiological impacts. Units 6 and
7 would not use the CCS for cooling. Rather, Units 6 and 7 would have a
closed-cycle cooling system with mechanical draft cooling towers. The
cooling towers would draw makeup from Miami-Dade Water and Sewer
Department reclaimed water and would discharge blowdown into deep
injection wells. Saltwater extracted from Biscayne Bay subsurface
sediment through radial collector wells proposed to be built on the
Turkey Point site would serve as a secondary source of makeup water
when a sufficient quantity and/or quality of reclaimed water is not
available. Because Units 6 and 7 would not use the CCS, the proposed
new units would not have a cumulative effect on CCS surface water
resources or CCS aquatic resources.
Regarding crocodiles, potential impacts to this species and its
critical habitat will be addressed in a future ESA section 7
consultation between the NRC and FWS. When considering cumulative
impacts on Federally listed species, the ESA's implementing regulations
direct Federal agencies to consider the effects of future State or
private activities, not involving Federal activities, that are
reasonably certain to occur within the action area of the Federal
action subject to consultation (50 CFR part 402.02; emphasis added).
Accordingly, the NRC will not address cumulative impacts of Units 6 and
7 on
[[Page 44469]]
the American crocodile in this EA because the NRC's issuance of a
license to construct and operate Units 6 and 7 is a separate Federal
activity that will require future consultation.
Regarding cumulative radiological impacts, the NRC and
Environmental Protection Agency have developed radiological dose limits
for protection of the public and workers that address the cumulative
effects of acute and long-term exposure to radiation and radioactive
material. These dose limits are specified in 10 CFR part 20 and 40 CFR
part 190.
The cumulative radiation dose to the public and workers is required
to be within the regulations cited above. The public dose limit of 25
millirem (0.25 millisieverts) in 40 CFR part 190 applies to all
reactors that may be on a site and also includes any other nearby
nuclear power reactor facilities. The NRC staff reviewed several years
of radiation dose data contained in the licensee's annual radioactive
effluent release reports for Turkey Point, and the data demonstrate
that the dose to members of the public from radioactive effluents is
within the limits of 10 CFR part 20 and 40 CFR part 190. As previously
indicated in the ``Radiological Impacts'' section of this environmental
assessment, the proposed action would result in no changes to radiation
levels or the types or quantities of radioactive effluents (gaseous or
liquid) that affect radiation exposures to plant workers and members of
the public.
FPL's COLA for Units 6 and 7 contains an assessment of the
radiation doses to members of the public from the proposed new reactors
and concludes that doses would be within regulatory limits. The staff
expects continued compliance with regulatory dose limits during
operation of Turkey Point, Units 3 and 4 under the proposed action.
Therefore, the NRC staff concludes that the cumulative radiological
impacts to members of the public that could result from the combined
operations of Turkey Point, Units 3 and 4 and the proposed new Units 6
and 7 would result in no significant impact on the environment.
Regarding radiation dose to workers, cumulative dose would only be
applicable for those workers that would be engaged at both facilities
(i.e., the currently operating Units 3 and 4 and proposed new Units 6
and 7). For Units 3 and 4, the licensee has a radiation protection
program that maintains worker doses within the dose limits in 10 CFR
part 20 during all phases of operations. Operation of Units 6 and 7
would require a similar radiation protection program, and the licensee
would be responsible for ensuring that workers are not exposed to dose
limits above those specified in 10 CFR part 20. Therefore, the NRC
staff concludes that the cumulative radiological impacts to plant
workers that could result from the combined operations of Turkey Point,
Units 3 and 4 and the proposed new Units 6 and 7 would result in no
significant impact on the radiological environment.
Cumulative Impacts Conclusion
The NRC staff considered the cumulative impacts of CCS chemical
treatments, current and anticipated future aquifer withdrawals, and the
possible future construction and operation of two new nuclear units on
the Turkey Point site. Based on the information presented in this
section, the NRC staff concludes that the proposed action, in
combination with other cumulative actions, would result in no
significant cumulative impacts on the environment.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered
denial of the proposed license amendments (i.e., the ``no-action''
alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in
current environmental conditions or impacts. However, denial would
result in reduced operational flexibility and could require FPL to
derate or shutdown Turkey Point if the UHS average supply water
temperature approaches or exceeds the 100[emsp14][deg]F TS limit. In
its application, FPL states that loss of load and voltage control
resulting from such a shutdown during periods of high summer demand
could result in impacts to grid reliability.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those previously considered in NUREG-1437, Supplement 5 prepared for
license renewal of Turkey Point.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On July 28, 2014, the NRC staff notified the Florida State
official, Ms. Cindy Becker, Chief of Bureau of Radiation Control, of
the Florida Department of Health, regarding the environmental impacts
of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
The NRC staff also coordinated with the FWS pursuant to
consultation under ESA section 7 during the staff's review of the
proposed action. The consultation is further discussed under the
``Federally-Protected Species'' section of this environmental
assessment.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC is considering issuing amendments for Renewed Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41, issued to FPL for operation
of Turkey Point to increase the UHS water temperature limit specified
in the Turkey Point TSs from 100[emsp14][deg]F to 104[emsp14][deg]F and
add an SR to monitor the UHS temperature more frequently if the UHS
temperature approaches the new limit.
On the basis of the EA included in Section II above and
incorporated by reference in this finding, the NRC concludes that the
proposed action would not have significant effects on the quality of
the human environment. The proposed action would result in no
significant impacts on surface water resources, aquatic resources, or
the radiological environment. In addition, the proposed action is not
likely to adversely affect any Federally-protected species or affect
any designated critical habitat. The proposed action would also not
result in significant cumulative impacts on any environmental
resources. The NRC's evaluation considered information provided in the
licensee's application and associated supplements; the NRC's staff
independent review of other environmental documents, and coordination
with the FWS pursuant to consultation under ESA section 7. Section IV
below lists the environmental documents related to the proposed action
and includes information on the availability of these documents. Based
on its findings, the NRC has decided not to prepare an environmental
impact statement for the proposed action.
IV. Availability of Documents
The following table identifies the environmental and other
documents cited in this document and related to the NRC's FONSI. These
documents are available for public inspection online through ADAMS at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html or in person at the NRC's PDR
as described previously.
[[Page 44470]]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Document Adams Accession No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Documents Related to License Amendment Request
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Florida Power & Light Company. License ML14196A006
Amendment Request No. 231, Application
to Revise Technical Specifications to
Revise Ultimate Heat Sink Temperature
Limit. Dated July 10, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. License ML14202A392
Amendment Request No. 231, Application
to Revise Ultimate Heat Sink
Temperature Limit--Request for
Emergency Approval. Dated July 17, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML14203A614
Turkey Point 3 and 4 Request for
Additional Information--LAR231 (TAC
MF4392 and MF4393). [1 of 2] Dated July
18, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML14203A618
Turkey Point 3 and 4 Request for
Additional Information--LAR231 (TAC
MF4392 and MF4393). [2 of 2] Dated July
18, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. License ML14204A367
Amendment Request No. 231, Application
to Revise Ultimate Heat Sink
Temperature Limit--Supplement 1, and
Response to Request for Additional
Information. Dated July 22, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. Response ML14204A368
to Request for Additional Information
Regarding License Amendment Request No.
231, Application to Revise Technical
Specifications to Revise Ultimate Heat
Sink Temperature Limit. Dated July 22,
2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML14204A814
Turkey Point 3 and 4 Request for
Additional Information--LAR231 (TAC
MF4392 and MF4393). Dated July 22, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML14204A652
Notice of Enforcement Discretion for
Florida Power & Light Company Regarding
Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit
Nos. 3 and 4 [NOED NO. 14-2-001]. Dated
July 23, 2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. Response ML14206A853
to Containment and Ventilation Branch
Request for Additional Information,
Regarding License Amendment Request No.
231, Application to Revise Ultimate
Heat Temperature Limit. Dated July 24,
2014.
Florida Power & Light Company. Turkey ML14204A129 (letter)
Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 ML14199A111 (enclosure)
and 4--Individual Notice of
Consideration of Issuance of Amendments
to Renewed Facility Operating Licenses,
Proposed No Significant Hazards
Consideration Determination, and
Opportunity for Hearing (Exigent
Circumstances) (TAC Nos. MF4392 and
MF4293). Dated July 24, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML14206A800
Request to Reinitiate Informal
Consultation for a Proposed License
Amendment to Increase the Ultimate Heat
Sink Temperature Limit at Turkey Point
Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 3 and 4.
Dated July 25, 2014.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML14206A806
Biological Assessment on the American
Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) for
Turkey Point Nuclear Generating Unit
Nos. 3 and 4 Proposed License Amendment
to Increase the Ultimate Heat Sink
Temperature Limit. Dated July 25, 2014.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other Referenced Documents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML020280236
Generic Environmental Impact Statement
for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants:
Regarding Turkey Point Units 3 and 4--
Final Report (NUREG-1437, Supplement
5). Dated January 28, 2002.
Florida Power & Light Company. Proposed ML091830589
Turkey Point Units 6 & 7, Project No.
763, Application for Combined License
for Turkey Point Units 6 and 7. Dated
June 30, 2009.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ML12074A251
Final Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
Related to a License Amendment To
Increase the Maximum Reactor Power
Level, Florida Power & Light Company;
Turkey Point, Units 3 and 4. Dated
March 27, 2012.
Florida Power & Light Company. Turkey ML13357A435
Point Units 6 & 7 Combine License
Application, Part 3: Environmental
Report, Revision 5. Dated December 23,
2013.
Florida Power & Light Company. Turkey ML14206A806 *
Point Units 3 and 4; Wastewater Permit
FL0001563; Request for Approval for the
Use of Copper Sulfate, Hydrogen
Peroxide, and a Bio-Stimulant in the
Treatment and Control of Blue Green
Algae in the Cooling Canal System.
Dated June 18, 2014.
Florida Department of Environmental ML14206A806 *
Protection. Re: Florida Power & Light,
Turkey Point, NPDES Permit FL0001562,
90-Day Trial Approval. Dated June 27,
2014.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation ML14206A806 *
Commission. Re: Florida Power & Light,
Turkey Point Plant Maintenance
Activity, NPDES Permit FL0001562, Miami-
Dade County. Dated July 1, 2014.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* (See Appendix A.)
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of July 2014.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lisa M. Regner,
Acting Chief, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2014-18159 Filed 7-30-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P