[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 187 (Wednesday, September 27, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49926-49927]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-23930]



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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Docket No. 50-251


Florida Power and Light Company, Turkey Point Unit 4; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption from Facility Operating License 
No. DPR-41, issued to Florida Power and Light Company (the licensee), 
for operation of Turkey Point Unit 4 located in Dade County, Florida.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    This Environmental Assessment has been prepared to address 
potential environmental issues related to the licensee's application of 
August 8, 1995, and revised by letter dated September 6, 1995. The 
proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements of 10 
CFR Part 50, Appendix J, Paragraph III.D.1.(a), to the extent that a 
one-time interval extension for the Type A test (containment integrated 
leak rate test) by one refueling outage from the March 1996 refueling 
outage to the October 1997 refueling outage would be granted.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to permit the licensee to defer the 
Type A test from the March 1996 refueling outage to the October 1997 
refueling outage. The exemption would permit a more flexible schedule 
for containment leak rate testing than provided for under the current 
regulations and result in significant cost savings.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that the proposed one-time exemption would not increase 
the probability or consequences of accidents previously analyzed and 
the proposed one-time exemption would not affect facility radiation 
levels or facility radiological effluents. The licensee will continue 
to be required to conduct the Type B and C local leak rate tests which 
historically have been shown to be the principal means of detecting 
containment leakage paths with the Type A tests confirming the Type B 
and C test results. It is also noted that the licensee, as a condition 
of the proposed exemption, will perform the visual containment 
inspection although it is only required by Appendix J to be conducted 
in conjunction with Type A tests. The NRC staff considers that these 
inspections, though limited in scope, provide an important added level 
of confidence in the continued integrity of the containment boundary. 
The change will not increase the probability or consequences of 
accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that 
may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in the 
allowable individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. 
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant 
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. 


[[Page 49927]]

    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 nonradiological 
plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Accordingly, the 
Commission concludes that there are no significant nonradiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    Since the Commission has concluded there is no measurable 
environmental impact associated with the proposed action, any 
alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be 
evaluated. As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff 
considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application 
would result in no change in current environmental impacts.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement dated July 
1972 for Turkey Point Unit 4.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on May 16, 1995 the NRC staff 
consulted with the Florida State official, Dr. Lyle Jerrett of the 
State Office of Radiation Control, regarding the environmental impact 
of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    Based upon the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission has 
determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the 
proposed action.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letters dated August 8, 1995, and September 6, 1995, which 
are available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document 
Room, The Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at 
the local public document room located at the Florida International 
University, University Park, Miami, Florida 33199.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of September 1995.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David B. Matthews,
Director, Project Directorate II-1, Division ofReactor Projects--I/II, 
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 95-23930 Filed 9-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P