[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 49 (Monday, March 13, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13340-13341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-6042]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, and 50-287]


Duke Energy Corporation; Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 
3, Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an amendment to the Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee/
Duke) for operation of the Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3, 
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55, 
respectively, located in Oconee County, Seneca, South Carolina.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed amendment would revise the Facility Operating Licenses 
by (a) deleting the license conditions that have been fulfilled by 
actions that have been completed, (b) changing the license conditions 
that have been superseded by the current plant status, and (c) 
incorporating other administrative changes. In particular, the proposed 
amendment would remove (1) License Condition 3.C.1 that requires the 
licensee to accumulate the information required to establish baselines 
for the evaluation of thermal, chemical, and radiological effects of 
station operation on terrestrial and aquatic biota in Lakes Keowee and 
Hartwell; (2) License Condition 3.C.2, which requires the licensee to 
develop and implement a comprehensive monitoring program that will 
permit surveillance during plant operation of thermal, chemical, and 
radiological effects of station operation on terrestrial and aquatic 
biota in Lakes Keowee and Hartwell; (3) License Condition 3.G, which 
requires the licensee to implement a secondary water chemistry program 
having specified attributes; (4) License Condition 3.H, which requires 
the licensee to implement a program having specified attributes to 
reduce leakage from certain systems outside containment; (5) License 
Condition 3.I, which requires the licensee to implement an iodine 
monitoring program having certain attributes; (6) License Condition 
3.J, which requires the licensee to implement a program ensuring the 
capability to accurately monitor the Reactor Coolant System subcooling 
margin; and (7) License Condition 3.K, which incorporates into the 
licenses the additional conditions currently set forth in Appendix C to 
the license. The proposed action also corrects clerical errors or out-
of-date information on the licenses.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for an amendment dated January 27, 2000.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    After the startup of Oconee, requirements related to the 
establishment of environmental programs and the performance of studies 
of the effects of plant operation on the environment have been 
regulated by other programs. These programs include the Environmental 
Protection Agency's (EPA's) National Pollution Discharge Elimination 
System program and Section 316(a) and 316(b) of the Clean Water Act and 
other EPA programs, the Oconee Environmental

[[Page 13341]]

Technical Specifications and Offside Dose Calculations Manual, plant 
design and operation as described in the Updated Final Safety Analysis 
Report, and criteria contained in the Selected Licensee Commitments 
Manual.
    In addition, the requirements in License Condition 3.G are 
equivalent to the requirements of Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.11, 
``Secondary Water Chemistry;'' the requirements of License Condition 
3.H are equivalent to those of TS 5.5.3, ``Reactor Coolant Sources 
Outside Containment;'' the requirements of License Condition 3.I are 
equivalent to those of TS 5.5.4, ``Post Accident Sampling;'' and the 
requirements of License Condition 3.J are equivalent to those of TS 
5.5.17, ``Backup Method for Determining Subcooling Margin.'' Finally, 
the additional conditions currently set forth in Appendix C to the 
license, and which are required by License Condition 3.K, are all one-
time or time-limited actions that have been completed and were 
adequately addressed.
    Therefore, elimination of the license conditions that are the 
subject of this environmental assessment would delete (1) provisions 
for certain activities that are regulated by other government agencies 
or are being addressed by other programs, (2) requirements redundant to 
those in TS, and (3) requirements for one-time or time-limited actions 
that have been completed and were adequately addressed. This would 
eliminate unnecessary license conditions from the Facility Operating 
Licenses.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action to implement the amendment would remove 
extraneous license conditions that (1) are now being regulated by other 
government agencies or were subsumed by other programs, (2) are 
redundant to TS, or (3) require actions that have been completed. The 
proposed action will not change the design of the facilities or the 
manner in which the licensee operates them. The staff has concluded 
that the proposed action will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents, there are no changes being 
made in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and 
there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation 
exposure. Therefore, the Commission concludes that there are no 
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological environmental impacts, the 
proposed action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect 
nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. 
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.

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. The environmental impacts of the proposed action 
and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the 
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on March 6, 2000, the staff 
consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mr. Virgil L. Autry 
of the Division of Radiological Waste Management, Bureau of Land and 
Waste Management, Department of Health and Environmental Control, 
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State 
official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined 
not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed 
action.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated January 27, 2000, which is available for public 
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, The Gelman 
Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC. Publically available 
records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Library 
component on the NRC Web site, http:\\www.nrc.gov (the Electronic 
Reading Room).

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 6th day of March 2000.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard L. Emch, Jr.,
Section Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing 
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 00-6042 Filed 3-10-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P