[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 27, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 4426]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-1648]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-250 and 50-251; NRC-2010-0025]
Florida Power and Light Company; Turkey Point Nuclear Generating
Units 3 and 4; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of an Exemption, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12 and 10 CFR 50.60(b)
from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.61 and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G
for Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-31 and DPR-41, issued to
Florida Power and Light Company (the licensee), for operation of the
Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, located in Miami, Florida. In accordance
with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared an environmental assessment
documenting its finding. The NRC concluded that the proposed actions
will have no significant environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from certain
requirements of 10 CFR 50.61, ``Fracture Toughness Requirements for
Protection Against Thermal Shock Events,'' and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix
G, ``Fracture Toughness Requirements.''
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated March 18, 2009.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed exemption would allow the licensee to use an
alternative method, described in Framatome ANP Topical Report BAW-2308,
Revisions 1-A and 2-A (supplemental), for determining the adjusted
RTNDT (reference nil-ductility temperature) of the Linde 80
weld materials present in the beltline region of the Turkey Point Units
3 and 4 reactor pressure vessels.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed
exemption. The staff concluded that the change would not significantly
affect plant safety and would not have a significant adverse effect on
the probability of an accident occurring. The proposed action would not
result in an increased radiological hazard beyond those previously
analyzed. There will be no change to radioactive effluents that effect
radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. The
proposed action will be performed inside existing plant buildings. No
changes will be made to plant buildings or the site property.
Therefore, no changes or different types of radiological impacts are
expected as a result of the proposed exemption.
The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-
radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity or the plant, or to threatened,
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Steven's Act
are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There would
be no impact to socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no changes or
different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are expected
as a result of the proposed exemption. Accordingly, the NRC concludes
that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
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 if granted.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed actions, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
Denial of the exemption request would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed
exemption and the ``no action'' alternative are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Turkey
Point Units 3 and 4, Docket No. 50-250 and 50-251, issued in 1972.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on January 6, 2010, the staff
consulted with the Florida State official, Charles Hamilton of the
Bureau of Radiation 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 March 18, 2009 (Agencywide Document Access and
Management System (ADAMS) No. ML090920408). Documents may be examined,
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, 1555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852. Publicly available records will be accessible
electronically from the 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 19th day of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jason C. Paige,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-1648 Filed 1-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P