[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 36 (Wednesday, February 24, 2010)]
[Pages 8410-8411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3667]



[Docket No. 50-261; NRC-2010-0062]

Carolina Power & Light Company: H. B. Robinson Steam Electric 
Plant, Unit No. 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an exemption pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5, ``Specific exemptions,'' from the 
implementation date for certain new requirements of 10 CFR Part 73, 
``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Facility Operating 
License No. DPR-23, issued to Carolina Power & Light Company (the 
licensee), for operation of the H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, 
Unit No. 2 (HBRSEP), located in Darlington County, South Carolina. In 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, ``Criteria for and identification of 
licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,'' 
the NRC prepared an environmental assessment documenting its finding. 
The NRC concluded that the proposed action will have no significant 
environmental impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt HBRSEP from the required 
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for two new requirements of 10 
CFR part 73. Specifically, HBRSEP would be granted an exemption from 
being in full compliance with certain new requirements contained in 10 
CFR 73.55, ``Requirements for physical protection of licensed 
activities in nuclear power reactors against radiological sabotage,'' 
by the March 31, 2010, deadline. The licensee has proposed an alternate 
full compliance implementation date of December 30, 2010, approximately 
9 months beyond the date required by 10 CFR part 73. The proposed 
action, an extension of the schedule for completion of certain actions 
required by the revised 10 CFR part 73, does not involve any physical 
changes to the reactor, fuel, plant structures, support structures, 
water, or land at the HBRSEP site.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated November 30, 2009.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The licensee has stated that it has performed an extensive 
evaluation of the revised 10 CFR part 73 and will achieve compliance 
with a vast majority of the revised rule by the March 31, 2010, 
compliance date. However, the licensee has determined that 
implementation of two specific provisions of the rule will require more 
time to implement because they involve upgrades to the security system 
that require significant physical modifications (e.g., the relocation 
of certain security assets to a new security building that will be 
constructed, and the addition of certain power supplies). Therefore, 
the licensee proposes to extend the compliance date beyond March 31, 
2010, to December 30, 2010, in order to complete these security 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the

[[Page 8411]]

proposed exemption. The staff has concluded that the proposed action to 
extend the implementation deadline would not significantly affect plant 
safety and would not have a significant adverse effect on the 
probability or consequences of an accident.
    The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological 
hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the environmental assessment 
and finding of no significant impact made by the Commission in 
promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73 as discussed in a Federal 
Register notice dated March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13967). There will be no 
change to radioactive effluents that affect radiation exposures to 
plant workers and members of the public. 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 of the plant, or to threatened, 
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or 
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens 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 to 
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. In addition, 
in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73, the Commission 
prepared an environmental assessment and published a finding of no 
significant impact (March 27, 2009, 74 FR 13967).
    The NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided as part of a 
letter to the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation, if 

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC 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. If the proposed action were denied, the licensee 
would have to comply with the March 31, 2010, implementation deadline. 
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 HBRSEP, 
dated April 1975, as supplemented through the ``Generic Environmental 
Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: H.B. Robinson 
Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2--Final Report (NUREG--1437, Supplement 

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on January 22, 2010, the 
staff consulted with the South Carolina State official, Mike Gandy of 
the South Carolina Bureau of Land and Waste Management, regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no 

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 November 30, 2009. Portions of the November 30, 
2009, submittal contain proprietary and security-related information, 
and accordingly, are not available to the public. Other parts of these 
documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 
O1 F21, 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 16th day of February 2010.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tracy J. Orf,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-3667 Filed 2-23-10; 8:45 am]