[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 2 (Wednesday, January 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-125]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-261]


Carolina Power & Light Company; H.R. Robinson Steam Electric 
Plant, Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License No. 
DPR-23 issued to Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee) for 
operation of H.R. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2 (HBR), 
located in Darlington County, South Carolina.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment would include provisions in Technical 
Specifications (TS) 5.3 and 5.4 which allow for the storage of fuel 
with an enrichment not to exceed 4.95 + 0.05 w/o U-235 in the new and 
spent fuel storage racks. The proposed action is in accordance with the 
licensee's application for amendment dated July 28, 1994.

The Need for Proposal Action

    The proposed changes are needed so that the licensee can use higher 
fuel enrichment to provide the flexibility of extending the fuel 
irradiation and to permit operation for longer fuel cycles.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed 
revisions to the TS. The proposed revisions would permit use of fuel 
enriched to a nominal 5.0 weight percent Uranium 235. The safety 
considerations associated with reactor operation with higher enrichment 
and extended irradiation have been evaluated by the NRC staff. The 
staff has concluded that such changes would not adversely affect plant 
safety. The proposed changes have no adverse effect on the probability 
of any accident. The higher enrichment, with fuel burnup to 60,000 
megawatt days per metric ton Uranium, may slightly change the mix of 
fission products that might be released in the event of a serious 
accident, but such small changes would not significantly affect the 
consequences of serious accidents. No changes are being made in the 
types or amount of any radiological effluents that may be released 
offsite. There is no significant increase in the allowable individual 
or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts of reactor 
operation with higher enrichment and extended irradiation, the proposed 
changes to the TS involve systems located with the restricted area, as 
defined in 10 CFR Part 20. They do not affect nonradiological plant 
effluents and have no other environmental impact.
    The environmental impact of transportation resulting from the use 
of higher enrichment fuel and extended irradiation were published and 
discussed in the staff assessment entitled, ``NRC Assessment of the 
Environmental effect of Transportation Resulting from Extended Fuel 
Enrichment and Irradiation,'' dated July 7, 1988, and published in the 
Federal Register (53 FR 30355) on August 11, 1988. As indicated therein 
the environmental cost contribution of the proposed increase in the 
fuel enrichment and irradiation limits are either unchanged or may, in 
fact, be reduced from those summaries in Table S-4 as set forth in 10 
CFR 51.52(c). Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no 
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed amendment.
    With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 
action does involve features located entirely within the restricted 
area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. It does not affect non-radiological 
plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the 
Commission concludes that there are no significant non-radiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission concluded that there are no significant 
environmental effects that would result from the proposed action, any 
other alternative would have equal or greater environmental impacts and 
need not be evaluated.
    The principal alternative would be to deny the requested amendment. 
This would not reduce the environmental impact of plant operations and 
would result in reduced operational flexibility.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to 
operation of HBR.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The NRC staff reviewed the licensee's request and did not consult 
other agencies or persons.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental 
impact statement for the proposed license amendments.
    Based upon the foregoing environmental assessment, we conclude that 
the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality 
of the human environment.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the 
application for amendments dated July 28, 1994, that is available for 
public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20555, and at the local 
public document room for the H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 
No. 2, at Hartsville Memorial Library, 147 West College, Hartsville, 
South Carolina 29550.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of December 1994.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Byron L. Siegel,
Acting Director Project Directorate II-1, Division of Reactor Projects 
I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-125 Filed 1-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M