[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 136 (Monday, July 16, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37073-37074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-17698]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-269, 50-270, 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 exemption from the requirements of Title 10 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Sec. 50.44, 10 CFR part 50, Appendix A, 
General Design Criterion 41, and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E, Section VI 
for Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-38, DPR-47, and DPR-55, issued 
to the Duke Energy Corporation (the licensee), for operation of the 
Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, and 3 (ONS), located in Seneca, 
South Carolina. The licensee requested the exemption by letter dated 
July 26, 2000.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the ONS from certain requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.44, 10 CFR part 50, Appendix A, General Design Criterion 
41, and Part 10 CFR 50, Appendix E, Section VI pertaining to the 
hydrogen control system requirements (i.e., containment post-accident 
hydrogen monitors and recombiners) and remove them from the ONS design 
basis. The licensee's exemption request from the functional 
requirements for hydrogen monitoring is not being approved. This 
position is described in the safety evaluation for the associated 
exemption. Consequently, this environmental assessment only addresses 
the exemption from the requirements related to the recombiners and the 
removal of the recombiners from the ONS design basis.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The requested exemption to remove the requirements pertaining to 
recombiners would improve the safety focus at ONS during an accident 
and would represent a more effective and efficient method of 
maintaining adequate protection of public health and safety by 
simplifying the Emergency and Emergency Response Plan Procedures. This 
would reduce the operators' post-accident burden and allow them to give 
higher priority to more important safety functions following postulated 
plant accidents.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes, as set forth below, that there are no environmental impacts 
associated with the removal of the recombiners from the ONS design 
basis. The proposed action will not significantly increase the 
probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in 
the types or amounts of any effluents that may be released off site, 
and there is no significant increase in occupational or public 
radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential nonradiological 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 ONS.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on July 2, 2001, the staff 
consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mr. Henry Porter of 
the Division of Waste Management, regarding the environmental impact of 
the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

[[Page 37074]]

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 July 26, 2000. Documents may be examined, and/
or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. If you do not have access to 
ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-
800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day of July 2001.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
David E. LaBarge,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate II, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 01-17698 Filed 7-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P