[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 151 (Monday, August 6, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 41054-41055]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-19593]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-277 and 50-278]


Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Peach Bottom Atomic Power 
Station, Unit Nos. 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 Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, section 71(e)(4) to Facility Operating 
License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56, issued to Exelon Generation Company, 
LLC, (the licensee), for operation of the Peach Bottom Atomic Power 
Station (PBAPS), Unit Nos. 2 and 3, located in York County, 
Pennsylvania.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee from some 
requirements of 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4) regarding submission of revisions to 
the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The proposed 
exemption would allow updates to the combined UFSAR for PBAPS, Unit 
Nos. 2 and 3, to be submitted within 6 months following completion of 
each PBAPS Unit 2 refueling outage, not to exceed 24 months from the 
previous submittal.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for exemption dated May 30, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    10 CFR 50.71(e)(4), requires licensees to submit updates to their 
UFSAR annually or within 6 months after each refueling outage provided 
that the interval between successive updates does not exceed 24 months. 
Since Units 2 and 3 share a common UFSAR, the licensee must update the 
same document annually or within 6 months after a refueling outage for 
either unit. The last change to 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4) was published in the 
Federal Register (57 FR 39358) on August 31, 1992, and became effective 
on October 1, 1992. The underlying purpose of the rule change was to 
relieve licensees of the burden of filing annual UFSAR revisions while 
assuring that such revisions are made at least every 24 months. 
However, as written, the burden reduction can only be realized by 
single-unit facilities, or multiple-unit facilities that maintain 
separate UFSARs for each unit. In the Summary and Analysis of Public 
Comments accompanying the 10 CFR 50.71(e)(4)

[[Page 41055]]

rule change published in the Federal Register (57 FR 39355, 1992), the 
NRC acknowledged that the final rule did not provide burden reduction 
to multiple-unit facilities sharing a common UFSAR. The NRC stated: 
``With respect to the concern about multiple facilities sharing a 
common FSAR, licensees will have maximum flexibility for scheduling 
updates on a case-by-case basis.'' Granting this exemption would 
provide burden reduction to PBAPS while still assuring that revisions 
to the UFSAR are made at least every 24 months.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that it involves administrative activities unrelated to plant 
operation.
    The proposed action will not increase the probability or 
consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
any effluents that may be released off site, and there is no increase 
in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no 
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect non-
radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. 
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.

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 PBAPS.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 18, 2001, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, Dennis Dyckman, 
of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Nuclear 
Safety Division, 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 May 30, 2001. 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. Persons who do not have access 
to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located 
in ADAMS may contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff 
by telephone at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by e-mail to 
[email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 31st day of July, 2001.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John P. Boska,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 01-19593 Filed 8-3-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P