[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 168 (Wednesday, August 31, 2005)]
[Pages 51853-51854]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E5-4750]



[Docket Nos. 50-317 and 50-318]

Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an exemption from Subsection (b)(1) of Section 50.68, 
``Criticality accident requirements,'' of part 50 of Title 10 of the 
Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) for Renewed Facility Operating 
License Nos. DPR-53 and DPR-69, issued to Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power 
Plant, Inc. (the licensee),

[[Page 51854]]

for operation of the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 
and 2 (CCNPP), located in Calvert County, Maryland. Therefore, as 
required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental 
assessment and finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the requirements 
of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1) during the handling and storage of spent nuclear 
fuel in a 10 CFR part 72 licensed spent fuel storage container that is 
in a CCNPP spent fuel pool. The proposed action is in accordance with 
the licensee's application dated December 21, 2004, as supplemented on 
May 31, 2005. The supplemental letter provided clarifying information 
that did not expand the scope of the original request.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    Under 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1), the Commission sets forth the following 
requirement that must be met, in lieu of a monitoring system capable of 
detecting criticality events. Plant procedures shall prohibit the 
handling and storage at any one time of more fuel assemblies than have 
been determined to be safely subcritical under the most adverse 
moderation conditions feasible by unborated water. Section 50.12(a) 
allows licensees to apply for an exemption from the requirements of 10 
CFR part 50 if the regulation is not necessary to achieve the 
underlying purpose of the rule and other conditions are met. The 
licensee has stated that the NRC has previously established five 
criteria that, if met, would satisfy the intent of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1).

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action 
and concludes that the exemption described above would continue to 
satisfy the underlying purpose of 10 CFR 50.68(b)(1). The details of 
the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that 
will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the 
exemption to the regulation. The proposed action will not significantly 
increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are 
being made in the types of effluents that may be released off site. 
There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released 
off site. 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 non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have a potential to affect 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.

Environmental Impacts of the 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

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for 
the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, dated April 
1984, and the Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for License 
Renewal of Nuclear Plants, Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant (NUREG-
1437, Supplement 1), dated October 1999.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on August 24, 2005, the staff 
consulted with the Maryland State official, R. McLean of the Maryland 
Department of Natural Resources, 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 
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated December 31, 2004, as supplemented by letter 
dated May 31, 2005. Documents may be viewed, and/or copied for a fee, 
at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 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 System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site, http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to 
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-
397-4209 or (301) 415-4737, or send an e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day of August, 2005.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patrick D. Milano,
Senior Project Manager, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E5-4750 Filed 8-30-05; 8:45 am]