Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant, 11233-11236 [2015-04288]

Download as PDF asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices 2. Department of Defense, National Reconnaissance Office; Department of Defense, National GeospatialIntelligence Agency; Department of Defense, National Security Agency (N1– 525–13–2, 4 items, 4 temporary items). Routine human resources records associated with a multi-mission ground station. 3. Department of Defense, National Reconnaissance Office; Department of Defense, National GeospatialIntelligence Agency; Department of Defense, National Security Agency (N1– 525–14–2, 3 items, 3 temporary items). Project files and routine information technology records associated with a multi-mission ground station. 4. Department of Defense, National Reconnaissance Office; Department of Defense, National GeospatialIntelligence Agency; Department of Defense, National Security Agency (N1– 525–14–3, 11 items, 11 temporary items). Routine environmental safety, health and wellness, facilities, and logistics records associated with a multi-mission ground station. 5. Department of Defense, National Reconnaissance Office; Department of Defense, National GeospatialIntelligence Agency; Department of Defense, National Security Agency (N1– 525–14–4, 7 items, 7 temporary items). Routine physical security records and information security records associated with a multi-mission ground station. 6. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration (DAA–0560–2013–0001, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Master files of an electronic information system used to track the collection and disposal of hazardous materials collected at screening checkpoints. 7. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration (DAA–0560–2013–0004, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Master files of an electronic information system used to track occupational health information. 8. Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration (DAA–0560–2013–0009, 2 items, 2 temporary items). Records related to performance audits at screening locations. 9. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (DAA–0436–2012–0005, 2 items, 2 temporary items). Master files and outputs of an electronic information system used to process background checks for firearms purchases. 10. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (DAA–0436–2012–0009, 2 items, 2 temporary items). Records VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Feb 27, 2015 Jkt 235001 related to the importation of firearms and ammunition. 11. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (DAA–0436–2012–0010, 9 items, 9 temporary items). Records related to firearms registration and taxation. Records also include master files and outputs of electronic information systems used in the administration of a firearms registration program. 12. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (DAA–0436–2012–0011, 2 items, 2 temporary items). Master files and outputs of an electronic information system used to manage investigative case files. 13. Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security (N1–59–11–13, 7 items, 7 temporary items). Records of the Office of Investigations and Counterintelligence including assessments, reports, administrative files, and investigative case files. 14. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (DAA– 0406–2013–0001, 2 items, 2 temporary items). Experimental project files and test and evaluation project files. 15. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (DAA– 0406–2014–0001, 3 items, 3 temporary items). Content records of agency social networking Web sites. 16. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration (DAA– 0406–2014–0002, 3 items, 3 temporary items). Loan and grant files. 17. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (DAA–0557–2013–0003, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Master files of an electronic information system used to track safety performance and compliance histories. 18. Export-Import Bank of the United States, Agency-wide (DAA–0275–2015– 0001, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Compliance documents, final agreements, and other transaction records. 19. Federal Communications Commission, Office of Media Relations (DAA–0173–2015–0001, 1 item, 1 temporary item). Content records of agency social networking Web sites. 20. James Madison Memorial Fellowship Foundation, Agency-wide (N1–508–15–1, 17 items, 8 temporary items). Routine and uncaptioned photographs, compliance reports, fellowship applications, administrative files, recipient financial records, and Web site records. Proposed for permanent retention are records of executive leadership, publications, PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 11233 news releases, video recordings, and event photographs. 21. National Archives and Records Administration, Government-wide (DAA–GRS–2014–0002, 20 items, 20 temporary items). General Records Schedule for employee acquisition records including classification standards, position descriptions, classification appeals, job vacancy case files and application packages, interview records, political appointment records, special hiring authority program records, and pre-appointment records. 22. National Archives and Records Administration, Government-wide (DAA–GRS–2015–0002, 3 items, 3 temporary items). General Records Schedule for classified information nondisclosure agreements and files relating to the inadvertent release of privileged information to unauthorized parties. 23. Office of the Federal Coordinator for Alaska Natural Gas Transportation Projects, Agency-wide (N1–596–15–1, 9 items, 4 temporary items). Records include correspondence, policy memorandums, and pilot project files. Proposed for permanent retention are records of the executive leadership, white papers, speeches, publications, and public presentations. Dated: February 23, 2015. Paul M. Wester Jr., Chief Records Officer for the U.S. Government. [FR Doc. 2015–04235 Filed 2–27–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7515–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–302; NRC–2015–0042] Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; issuance. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of exemptions in response to a request from Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF, the licensee) that would permit the licensee to reduce its emergency planning (EP) activities at the Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR–3). CR–3 has been shut down since September 26, 2009, and the final removal of fuel from the reactor vessel was completed on May 28, 2011. By letter dated February 20, 2013, DEF SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM 02MRN1 asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES 11234 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices submitted a certification to the NRC of permanent cessation of power operations and the removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. The licensee is seeking exemptions that would eliminate the requirements to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities based on the reduced risks at the permanently shutdown and defueled reactor. Offsite EP provisions would still exist using a comprehensive emergency management plan process. The NRC staff is issuing a final environmental assessment (EA) and final finding of no significant impact (FONSI) associated with the proposed exemptions. DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on March 2, 2015. ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015–0042 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You may obtain publicly-available 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–2015–0042. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; 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 publiclyavailable documents online in the ADAMS 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 document (if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that a document is referenced. • 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: Michael D. Orenak, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415–3229; email: Michael.Orenak@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Feb 27, 2015 Jkt 235001 I. Introduction Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR–3) is a permanently shutdown and defueled power reactor in the process of decommissioning. CR–3 is located in Citrus County, Florida, 80 miles north of Tampa, FL. Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF, the licensee) is the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR–72 for CR–3. CR–3 has been shut down since September 26, 2009, and the final removal of fuel from the reactor vessel was completed on May 28, 2011. By letter dated February 20, 2013, DEF submitted a certification to the NRC of permanent cessation of power operations and the removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. As a permanently shutdown and defueled facility, and pursuant to section 50.82(a)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), CR–3 is no longer authorized to be operated or to have fuel placed into its reactor vessel, but the licensee is still authorized to possess and store irradiated nuclear fuel. Irradiated fuel is currently stored onsite at CR–3 in a spent fuel pool (SFP). The licensee has requested exemptions from certain emergency planning (EP) requirements in 10 CFR part 50, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,’’ for CR–3. The NRC regulations concerning EP do not recognize the reduced risks after a reactor is permanently shut down and defueled. A permanently shutdown reactor, such as CR–3, must continue to maintain the same EP requirements as an operating power reactor under the existing regulatory requirements. To establish a level of EP commensurate with the reduced risks of a permanently shutdown and defueled reactor, DEF requires exemptions from certain EP regulatory requirements before it can change its emergency plans. The NRC is considering issuance of exemptions to DEF from portions of 10 CFR 50.47, ‘‘Emergency plans,’’ and 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, ‘‘Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization Facilities,’’ which would permit DEF to modify its emergency plan to eliminate the requirements to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities based on the reduced risks at CR–3, due to its permanently shutdown and defueled status. Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC has reviewed the requirements in 10 CFR 51.20(b) and 10 CFR 51.22(c) and determined that an environmental assessment (EA) is the appropriate form of environmental review for the requested action. Based PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 on the results of the EA, which is provided in Section II of this document, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action, and is issuing a finding of no significant impact. II. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would exempt DEF from meeting certain requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.47 and appendix E to 10 CFR part 50. More specifically, DEF requested exemptions from (1) certain requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response plans for nuclear power reactors, (2) certain requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish plume exposure and ingestion pathway EP zones for nuclear power reactors, and (3) certain requirements in 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, section IV, which establishes the elements that make up the content of emergency plans. The proposed action of granting these exemptions would result in the elimination of the requirements for the licensee to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities at CR–3, based on the reduced risks at the permanently shutdown and defueled reactor. However, requirements for certain onsite capabilities to communicate and coordinate with offsite response authorities will be retained. If necessary, offsite protective actions could still be implemented using a comprehensive emergency management plan (CEMP) process. A CEMP in this context, also referred to as an emergency operations plan (EOP), is addressed in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101, ‘‘Developing and Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans.’’ The CPG 101 is the foundation for State, territorial, tribal, and local EP in the United States. It promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed planning and decisionmaking, and helps planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable, all-hazards, all-threats emergency plans. An EOP is flexible enough for use in all emergencies. It describes how people and property will be protected; details regarding who is responsible for carrying out specific actions; identifies the personnel, equipment, facilities, supplies, and other resources available; and outlines how all actions will be coordinated. A CEMP is often referred to as a synonym for ‘‘all hazards planning.’’ E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM 02MRN1 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated September 26, 2013, ‘‘Permanently Defueled Emergency Plan and Emergency Action Level Scheme, and Request for Exemption to Certain Radiological Emergency Response Plan Requirements Defined by 10 CFR [Part] 50’’ (ADAMS Accession No. ML13274A584), as supplemented by letters dated March 28, 2014, and August 28, 2014. In its letter dated March 28, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14098A072), DEF provided responses to the NRC staff’s request for additional information concerning the proposed exemptions. In its letter dated August 28, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14251A237), DEF provided a supplement, which amended its request to align with the exemptions approved in Staff Requirements Memorandum to SECY–14–0066 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14219A366). Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed for DEF to revise the CR–3 emergency plan to reflect the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the facility. The EP requirements currently applicable to CR–3 are for an operating power reactor. There are no explicit regulatory provisions distinguishing EP requirements for a power reactor that has been permanently shutdown from those for an operating power reactor. Therefore, since the 10 CFR part 50 license for CR–3 no longer authorizes operation of the reactor or emplacement or retention of fuel into the reactor vessel as specified in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2), the occurrence of postulated accidents associated with reactor operation is no longer credible. In its exemption request, the licensee identified six possible radiological accidents at CR–3 in its permanently shut down and defueled condition. These are (1) a fuel handling accident, (2) a radioactive waste handling accident, (3) a loss of SFP normal cooling (boil off), (4) a loss of SFP inventory with air-cooling, (5) an adiabatic heatup of the hottest fuel assembly, and (6) a loss of SFP inventory radiation dose. The NRC staff evaluated these possible radiological accidents in the Commission Paper (SECY) 14–0118, ‘‘Request by Duke Energy Florida, Inc., for Exemptions from Certain Emergency Planning Requirements,’’ dated October 29, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14219A444). In SECY–14–0118, the staff verified that DEF’s analyses and calculations provide reasonable assurance that if the requested exemptions were granted, then (1) for a design-basis accident VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Feb 27, 2015 Jkt 235001 (DBA), an offsite radiological release will not exceed the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Protective Action Guides (PAGs) at the exclusion area boundary, as detailed in the EPA ‘‘PAG Manual, Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological Incidents,’’ dated March 2013, which was issued as Draft for Interim Use and Public Comment; and, (2) in the unlikely event of a beyond DBA resulting in a loss of all SFP cooling, there is sufficient time to initiate appropriate mitigating actions, and in the unlikely event that a release is projected to occur, there is sufficient time for offsite agencies to take protective actions using a CEMP to protect the health and safety of the public. The Commission approved the NRC staff’s recommendation to grant the exemptions in the Staff Requirements Memorandum to SECY–14–0118, dated December 30, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14364A111). Based on these analyses, the licensee states that complete application of the EP rule, in its particular circumstances as a permanently shutdown and defueled reactor with sufficiently cooled spent fuel in its spent fuel pool, would not serve the underlying purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. DEF also states that it would incur undue costs in the application of operating plant EP requirements for the maintenance of an emergency response organization in excess of that actually needed to respond to the diminished scope of credible accidents for a permanently shutdown and defueled reactor, with sufficiently cooled spent fuel in its spent fuel pool. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC staff concluded that the exemptions, if granted, will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents at CR–3 in its permanently shutdown and defueled condition. There will be no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite. There will be no significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite. There will be no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regards to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not have any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 11235 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 staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. Therefore, the environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The proposed action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for CR–3, dated May 1973 (ADAMS Accession No. ML091520178). Agencies or Persons Consulted The NRC staff did not enter into consultation with any other Federal agency or with the State of Florida regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. On January 20, 2015, the Florida state representative was notified of this EA and FONSI and did not provide any comments. III. Finding of No Significant Impact The licensee has proposed exemptions from (1) certain requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response plans for nuclear power reactors; (2) certain requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish plume exposure and ingestion pathway EP zones for nuclear power reactors; and (3) certain requirements in 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, section IV, which establishes the elements that make up the content of emergency plans. The proposed action of granting these exemptions would result in the elimination of the requirements for the licensee to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities at CR–3, based on the reduced risks at the permanently shutdown and defueled reactor. However, requirements for certain onsite capabilities to communicate and coordinate with offsite response authorities will be retained. Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC conducted the EA for the proposed E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM 02MRN1 11236 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 40 / Monday, March 2, 2015 / Notices action included in Section II of this document and incorporated by reference in this finding. On the basis of this EA, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has decided not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action. This EA and FONSI is based on the licensee’s letter dated September 26, 2013, as supplemented by letters dated March 28, 2014, and August 28, 2014. Otherwise, there are no other environmental documents associated with this review. These documents are available for public inspection as indicated above. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of February, 2015. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Meena K. Khanna, Chief, Plant Licensing IV–2 and Decommissioning Transition Branch, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2015–04288 Filed 2–27–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–247; NRC–2015–0038] Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., Indian Point Nuclear Generating, Unit 2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: License amendment application; opportunity to comment, request a hearing, and petition for leave to intervene. AGENCY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR–26, issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., for operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating, Unit 2. The proposed amendment would allow a revision to the acceptance criteria for the Surveillance Requirement 3.1.4.2 for Control Rod G–3. During the last two performances of this Surveillance on September 18, 2014, and December 11, 2014, Control Rod G–3 misalignment occurred with Shutdown Bank B group movement as displayed by the Individual Rod Position Indication and Plant Instrument Computer System. The proposed change is to defer subsequent testing of the Control Rod G–3 until repaired during the next refuel outage (March 2016) or forced outage long enough to repair the Control Rod. asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Sep<11>2014 16:55 Feb 27, 2015 Jkt 235001 Submit comments by April 1, 2015. Requests for a hearing or petition for leave to intervene must be filed by May 1, 2015. ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods (unless this document describes a different method for submitting comments on a specific subject): • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2015–0038. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document. • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, Mail Stop: OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001. For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting comments, see ‘‘Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments’’ in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas V. Pickett, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone: 301–415– 1364, email: Douglas.Pickett@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DATES: I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments A. Obtaining Information Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2015– 0038 when contacting the NRC about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain publiclyavailable information related to this action by any of the following methods: • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC–2015–0038. • NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the ADAMS 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 Proposed License Amendment Regarding a Change to Technical Specification 3.1.4, ‘‘Reactivity Control PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Systems’’, is available in ADAMS under Accession No. ML15044A471. • 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. B. Submitting Comments Please include Docket ID NRC–2015– 0038 in the subject line of your comment submission, in order to ensure that the NRC is able to make your comment submission available to the public in this docket. The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at https:// www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove identifying or contact information. If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove such information before making the comment submissions available to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS. I. Introduction The NRC is considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR–26, issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., for operation of the Indian Point Nuclear Generating, Unit 2, located in Westchester County, New York. The proposed amendment would allow a revision to the acceptance criteria for Surveillance Requirement 3.1.4.2 for Control Rod G–3. During the last two performances of this Surveillance on September 18, 2014, and December 11, 2014, Control Rod G– 3 misalignment occurred with Shutdown Bank B group movement as displayed by the Individual Rod Position Indication and Plant Instrument Computer System. The proposed change is to defer subsequent testing of the Control Rod G–3 until repaired during the next refuel outage (March 2016) or forced outage long enough to repair the Control Rod. Before any issuance of the proposed license amendment, the NRC will need to make the findings required by the E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM 02MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11233-11236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04288]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-302; NRC-2015-0042]


Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear 
Generating Plant

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; 
issuance.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of exemptions in response to a request from Duke Energy 
Florida, Inc. (DEF, the licensee) that would permit the licensee to 
reduce its emergency planning (EP) activities at the Crystal River Unit 
3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-3). CR-3 has been shut down since 
September 26, 2009, and the final removal of fuel from the reactor 
vessel was completed on May 28, 2011. By letter dated February 20, 
2013, DEF

[[Page 11234]]

submitted a certification to the NRC of permanent cessation of power 
operations and the removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. The 
licensee is seeking exemptions that would eliminate the requirements to 
maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce some of the 
onsite EP activities based on the reduced risks at the permanently 
shutdown and defueled reactor. Offsite EP provisions would still exist 
using a comprehensive emergency management plan process. The NRC staff 
is issuing a final environmental assessment (EA) and final finding of 
no significant impact (FONSI) associated with the proposed exemptions.

DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on 
March 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0042 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may obtain publicly-available 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-2015-0042. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; 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 
ADAMS 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 document 
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time 
that a document is referenced.
     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: Michael D. Orenak, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3229; email: Michael.Orenak@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-3) is a 
permanently shutdown and defueled power reactor in the process of 
decommissioning. CR-3 is located in Citrus County, Florida, 80 miles 
north of Tampa, FL. Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF, the licensee) is 
the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-72 for CR-3. CR-3 has 
been shut down since September 26, 2009, and the final removal of fuel 
from the reactor vessel was completed on May 28, 2011. By letter dated 
February 20, 2013, DEF submitted a certification to the NRC of 
permanent cessation of power operations and the removal of fuel from 
the reactor vessel. As a permanently shutdown and defueled facility, 
and pursuant to section 50.82(a)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), CR-3 is no longer authorized to be operated or to 
have fuel placed into its reactor vessel, but the licensee is still 
authorized to possess and store irradiated nuclear fuel. Irradiated 
fuel is currently stored onsite at CR-3 in a spent fuel pool (SFP). The 
licensee has requested exemptions from certain emergency planning (EP) 
requirements in 10 CFR part 50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and 
Utilization Facilities,'' for CR-3. The NRC regulations concerning EP 
do not recognize the reduced risks after a reactor is permanently shut 
down and defueled. A permanently shutdown reactor, such as CR-3, must 
continue to maintain the same EP requirements as an operating power 
reactor under the existing regulatory requirements. To establish a 
level of EP commensurate with the reduced risks of a permanently 
shutdown and defueled reactor, DEF requires exemptions from certain EP 
regulatory requirements before it can change its emergency plans.
    The NRC is considering issuance of exemptions to DEF from portions 
of 10 CFR 50.47, ``Emergency plans,'' and 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, 
``Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization 
Facilities,'' which would permit DEF to modify its emergency plan to 
eliminate the requirements to maintain offsite radiological emergency 
plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities based on the reduced 
risks at CR-3, due to its permanently shutdown and defueled status. 
Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC has reviewed the requirements in 
10 CFR 51.20(b) and 10 CFR 51.22(c) and determined that an 
environmental assessment (EA) is the appropriate form of environmental 
review for the requested action. Based on the results of the EA, which 
is provided in Section II of this document, the NRC has determined not 
to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action, 
and is issuing a finding of no significant impact.

II. Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt DEF from meeting certain 
requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.47 and appendix E to 10 CFR part 
50. More specifically, DEF requested exemptions from (1) certain 
requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency 
response plans for nuclear power reactors, (2) certain requirements in 
10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish plume exposure and ingestion pathway EP 
zones for nuclear power reactors, and (3) certain requirements in 10 
CFR part 50, appendix E, section IV, which establishes the elements 
that make up the content of emergency plans. The proposed action of 
granting these exemptions would result in the elimination of the 
requirements for the licensee to maintain offsite radiological 
emergency plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities at CR-3, 
based on the reduced risks at the permanently shutdown and defueled 
reactor. However, requirements for certain onsite capabilities to 
communicate and coordinate with offsite response authorities will be 
retained. If necessary, offsite protective actions could still be 
implemented using a comprehensive emergency management plan (CEMP) 
process. A CEMP in this context, also referred to as an emergency 
operations plan (EOP), is addressed in the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency's Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101, ``Developing and 
Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans.'' The CPG 101 is the foundation 
for State, territorial, tribal, and local EP in the United States. It 
promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed 
planning and decisionmaking, and helps planners at all levels of 
government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable, all-
hazards, all-threats emergency plans. An EOP is flexible enough for use 
in all emergencies. It describes how people and property will be 
protected; details regarding who is responsible for carrying out 
specific actions; identifies the personnel, equipment, facilities, 
supplies, and other resources available; and outlines how all actions 
will be coordinated. A CEMP is often referred to as a synonym for ``all 
hazards planning.''

[[Page 11235]]

    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated September 26, 2013, ``Permanently Defueled Emergency 
Plan and Emergency Action Level Scheme, and Request for Exemption to 
Certain Radiological Emergency Response Plan Requirements Defined by 10 
CFR [Part] 50'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML13274A584), as supplemented by 
letters dated March 28, 2014, and August 28, 2014. In its letter dated 
March 28, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14098A072), DEF provided 
responses to the NRC staff's request for additional information 
concerning the proposed exemptions. In its letter dated August 28, 2014 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14251A237), DEF provided a supplement, which 
amended its request to align with the exemptions approved in Staff 
Requirements Memorandum to SECY-14-0066 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML14219A366).

Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed for DEF to revise the CR-3 emergency 
plan to reflect the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the 
facility. The EP requirements currently applicable to CR-3 are for an 
operating power reactor. There are no explicit regulatory provisions 
distinguishing EP requirements for a power reactor that has been 
permanently shutdown from those for an operating power reactor. 
Therefore, since the 10 CFR part 50 license for CR-3 no longer 
authorizes operation of the reactor or emplacement or retention of fuel 
into the reactor vessel as specified in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2), the 
occurrence of postulated accidents associated with reactor operation is 
no longer credible.
    In its exemption request, the licensee identified six possible 
radiological accidents at CR-3 in its permanently shut down and 
defueled condition. These are (1) a fuel handling accident, (2) a 
radioactive waste handling accident, (3) a loss of SFP normal cooling 
(boil off), (4) a loss of SFP inventory with air-cooling, (5) an 
adiabatic heatup of the hottest fuel assembly, and (6) a loss of SFP 
inventory radiation dose. The NRC staff evaluated these possible 
radiological accidents in the Commission Paper (SECY) 14-0118, 
``Request by Duke Energy Florida, Inc., for Exemptions from Certain 
Emergency Planning Requirements,'' dated October 29, 2014 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML14219A444). In SECY-14-0118, the staff verified that 
DEF's analyses and calculations provide reasonable assurance that if 
the requested exemptions were granted, then (1) for a design-basis 
accident (DBA), an offsite radiological release will not exceed the 
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Protective Action Guides (PAGs) 
at the exclusion area boundary, as detailed in the EPA ``PAG Manual, 
Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological 
Incidents,'' dated March 2013, which was issued as Draft for Interim 
Use and Public Comment; and, (2) in the unlikely event of a beyond DBA 
resulting in a loss of all SFP cooling, there is sufficient time to 
initiate appropriate mitigating actions, and in the unlikely event that 
a release is projected to occur, there is sufficient time for offsite 
agencies to take protective actions using a CEMP to protect the health 
and safety of the public. The Commission approved the NRC staff's 
recommendation to grant the exemptions in the Staff Requirements 
Memorandum to SECY-14-0118, dated December 30, 2014 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML14364A111).
    Based on these analyses, the licensee states that complete 
application of the EP rule, in its particular circumstances as a 
permanently shutdown and defueled reactor with sufficiently cooled 
spent fuel in its spent fuel pool, would not serve the underlying 
purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying 
purpose of the rule. DEF also states that it would incur undue costs in 
the application of operating plant EP requirements for the maintenance 
of an emergency response organization in excess of that actually needed 
to respond to the diminished scope of credible accidents for a 
permanently shutdown and defueled reactor, with sufficiently cooled 
spent fuel in its spent fuel pool.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff concluded that the exemptions, if granted, will not 
significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents at 
CR-3 in its permanently shutdown and defueled condition. There will be 
no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be 
released offsite. There will be no significant increase in the amounts 
of any effluents that may be released offsite. There will be no 
significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational or public 
radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regards to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water 
resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no 
known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with 
the proposed action. Therefore, there are no significant non-
radiological 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 staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the application would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. Therefore, the environmental impacts of the 
proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The proposed action does not involve the use of any different 
resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental 
Statement for CR-3, dated May 1973 (ADAMS Accession No. ML091520178).

Agencies or Persons Consulted

    The NRC staff did not enter into consultation with any other 
Federal agency or with the State of Florida regarding the environmental 
impact of the proposed action. On January 20, 2015, the Florida state 
representative was notified of this EA and FONSI and did not provide 
any comments.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    The licensee has proposed exemptions from (1) certain requirements 
in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response 
plans for nuclear power reactors; (2) certain requirements in 10 CFR 
50.47(c)(2) to establish plume exposure and ingestion pathway EP zones 
for nuclear power reactors; and (3) certain requirements in 10 CFR part 
50, appendix E, section IV, which establishes the elements that make up 
the content of emergency plans. The proposed action of granting these 
exemptions would result in the elimination of the requirements for the 
licensee to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce 
some of the onsite EP activities at CR-3, based on the reduced risks at 
the permanently shutdown and defueled reactor. However, requirements 
for certain onsite capabilities to communicate and coordinate with 
offsite response authorities will be retained.
    Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC conducted the EA for the 
proposed

[[Page 11236]]

action included in Section II of this document and incorporated by 
reference in this finding. On the basis of this EA, the NRC concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has decided not 
to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
    This EA and FONSI is based on the licensee's letter dated September 
26, 2013, as supplemented by letters dated March 28, 2014, and August 
28, 2014. Otherwise, there are no other environmental documents 
associated with this review. These documents are available for public 
inspection as indicated above.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of February, 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Meena K. Khanna,
Chief, Plant Licensing IV-2 and Decommissioning Transition Branch, 
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2015-04288 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.