[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 40 (Monday, March 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11233-11236]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-04288]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-302; NRC-2015-0042]


Duke Energy Florida, Inc.; Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear 
Generating Plant

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; 
issuance.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of exemptions in response to a request from Duke Energy 
Florida, Inc. (DEF, the licensee) that would permit the licensee to 
reduce its emergency planning (EP) activities at the Crystal River Unit 
3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-3). CR-3 has been shut down since 
September 26, 2009, and the final removal of fuel from the reactor 
vessel was completed on May 28, 2011. By letter dated February 20, 
2013, DEF

[[Page 11234]]

submitted a certification to the NRC of permanent cessation of power 
operations and the removal of fuel from the reactor vessel. The 
licensee is seeking exemptions that would eliminate the requirements to 
maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce some of the 
onsite EP activities based on the reduced risks at the permanently 
shutdown and defueled reactor. Offsite EP provisions would still exist 
using a comprehensive emergency management plan process. The NRC staff 
is issuing a final environmental assessment (EA) and final finding of 
no significant impact (FONSI) associated with the proposed exemptions.

DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on 
March 2, 2015.

ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0042 when contacting the 
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You 
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document 
using any of the following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0042. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The 
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document 
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time 
that a document is referenced.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael D. Orenak, Office of Nuclear 
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-3229; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR-3) is a 
permanently shutdown and defueled power reactor in the process of 
decommissioning. CR-3 is located in Citrus County, Florida, 80 miles 
north of Tampa, FL. Duke Energy Florida, Inc. (DEF, the licensee) is 
the holder of Facility Operating License No. DPR-72 for CR-3. CR-3 has 
been shut down since September 26, 2009, and the final removal of fuel 
from the reactor vessel was completed on May 28, 2011. By letter dated 
February 20, 2013, DEF submitted a certification to the NRC of 
permanent cessation of power operations and the removal of fuel from 
the reactor vessel. As a permanently shutdown and defueled facility, 
and pursuant to section 50.82(a)(2) of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR), CR-3 is no longer authorized to be operated or to 
have fuel placed into its reactor vessel, but the licensee is still 
authorized to possess and store irradiated nuclear fuel. Irradiated 
fuel is currently stored onsite at CR-3 in a spent fuel pool (SFP). The 
licensee has requested exemptions from certain emergency planning (EP) 
requirements in 10 CFR part 50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and 
Utilization Facilities,'' for CR-3. The NRC regulations concerning EP 
do not recognize the reduced risks after a reactor is permanently shut 
down and defueled. A permanently shutdown reactor, such as CR-3, must 
continue to maintain the same EP requirements as an operating power 
reactor under the existing regulatory requirements. To establish a 
level of EP commensurate with the reduced risks of a permanently 
shutdown and defueled reactor, DEF requires exemptions from certain EP 
regulatory requirements before it can change its emergency plans.
    The NRC is considering issuance of exemptions to DEF from portions 
of 10 CFR 50.47, ``Emergency plans,'' and 10 CFR part 50, appendix E, 
``Emergency Planning and Preparedness for Production and Utilization 
Facilities,'' which would permit DEF to modify its emergency plan to 
eliminate the requirements to maintain offsite radiological emergency 
plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities based on the reduced 
risks at CR-3, due to its permanently shutdown and defueled status. 
Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC has reviewed the requirements in 
10 CFR 51.20(b) and 10 CFR 51.22(c) and determined that an 
environmental assessment (EA) is the appropriate form of environmental 
review for the requested action. Based on the results of the EA, which 
is provided in Section II of this document, the NRC has determined not 
to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action, 
and is issuing a finding of no significant impact.

II. Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt DEF from meeting certain 
requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.47 and appendix E to 10 CFR part 
50. More specifically, DEF requested exemptions from (1) certain 
requirements in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency 
response plans for nuclear power reactors, (2) certain requirements in 
10 CFR 50.47(c)(2) to establish plume exposure and ingestion pathway EP 
zones for nuclear power reactors, and (3) certain requirements in 10 
CFR part 50, appendix E, section IV, which establishes the elements 
that make up the content of emergency plans. The proposed action of 
granting these exemptions would result in the elimination of the 
requirements for the licensee to maintain offsite radiological 
emergency plans and reduce some of the onsite EP activities at CR-3, 
based on the reduced risks at the permanently shutdown and defueled 
reactor. However, requirements for certain onsite capabilities to 
communicate and coordinate with offsite response authorities will be 
retained. If necessary, offsite protective actions could still be 
implemented using a comprehensive emergency management plan (CEMP) 
process. A CEMP in this context, also referred to as an emergency 
operations plan (EOP), is addressed in the Federal Emergency Management 
Agency's Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101, ``Developing and 
Maintaining Emergency Operations Plans.'' The CPG 101 is the foundation 
for State, territorial, tribal, and local EP in the United States. It 
promotes a common understanding of the fundamentals of risk-informed 
planning and decisionmaking, and helps planners at all levels of 
government in their efforts to develop and maintain viable, all-
hazards, all-threats emergency plans. An EOP is flexible enough for use 
in all emergencies. It describes how people and property will be 
protected; details regarding who is responsible for carrying out 
specific actions; identifies the personnel, equipment, facilities, 
supplies, and other resources available; and outlines how all actions 
will be coordinated. A CEMP is often referred to as a synonym for ``all 
hazards planning.''

[[Page 11235]]

    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated September 26, 2013, ``Permanently Defueled Emergency 
Plan and Emergency Action Level Scheme, and Request for Exemption to 
Certain Radiological Emergency Response Plan Requirements Defined by 10 
CFR [Part] 50'' (ADAMS Accession No. ML13274A584), as supplemented by 
letters dated March 28, 2014, and August 28, 2014. In its letter dated 
March 28, 2014 (ADAMS Accession No. ML14098A072), DEF provided 
responses to the NRC staff's request for additional information 
concerning the proposed exemptions. In its letter dated August 28, 2014 
(ADAMS Accession No. ML14251A237), DEF provided a supplement, which 
amended its request to align with the exemptions approved in Staff 
Requirements Memorandum to SECY-14-0066 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML14219A366).

Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed for DEF to revise the CR-3 emergency 
plan to reflect the permanently shutdown and defueled status of the 
facility. The EP requirements currently applicable to CR-3 are for an 
operating power reactor. There are no explicit regulatory provisions 
distinguishing EP requirements for a power reactor that has been 
permanently shutdown from those for an operating power reactor. 
Therefore, since the 10 CFR part 50 license for CR-3 no longer 
authorizes operation of the reactor or emplacement or retention of fuel 
into the reactor vessel as specified in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(2), the 
occurrence of postulated accidents associated with reactor operation is 
no longer credible.
    In its exemption request, the licensee identified six possible 
radiological accidents at CR-3 in its permanently shut down and 
defueled condition. These are (1) a fuel handling accident, (2) a 
radioactive waste handling accident, (3) a loss of SFP normal cooling 
(boil off), (4) a loss of SFP inventory with air-cooling, (5) an 
adiabatic heatup of the hottest fuel assembly, and (6) a loss of SFP 
inventory radiation dose. The NRC staff evaluated these possible 
radiological accidents in the Commission Paper (SECY) 14-0118, 
``Request by Duke Energy Florida, Inc., for Exemptions from Certain 
Emergency Planning Requirements,'' dated October 29, 2014 (ADAMS 
Accession No. ML14219A444). In SECY-14-0118, the staff verified that 
DEF's analyses and calculations provide reasonable assurance that if 
the requested exemptions were granted, then (1) for a design-basis 
accident (DBA), an offsite radiological release will not exceed the 
Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Protective Action Guides (PAGs) 
at the exclusion area boundary, as detailed in the EPA ``PAG Manual, 
Protective Action Guides and Planning Guidance for Radiological 
Incidents,'' dated March 2013, which was issued as Draft for Interim 
Use and Public Comment; and, (2) in the unlikely event of a beyond DBA 
resulting in a loss of all SFP cooling, there is sufficient time to 
initiate appropriate mitigating actions, and in the unlikely event that 
a release is projected to occur, there is sufficient time for offsite 
agencies to take protective actions using a CEMP to protect the health 
and safety of the public. The Commission approved the NRC staff's 
recommendation to grant the exemptions in the Staff Requirements 
Memorandum to SECY-14-0118, dated December 30, 2014 (ADAMS Accession 
No. ML14364A111).
    Based on these analyses, the licensee states that complete 
application of the EP rule, in its particular circumstances as a 
permanently shutdown and defueled reactor with sufficiently cooled 
spent fuel in its spent fuel pool, would not serve the underlying 
purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying 
purpose of the rule. DEF also states that it would incur undue costs in 
the application of operating plant EP requirements for the maintenance 
of an emergency response organization in excess of that actually needed 
to respond to the diminished scope of credible accidents for a 
permanently shutdown and defueled reactor, with sufficiently cooled 
spent fuel in its spent fuel pool.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff concluded that the exemptions, if granted, will not 
significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents at 
CR-3 in its permanently shutdown and defueled condition. There will be 
no significant change in the types of any effluents that may be 
released offsite. There will be no significant increase in the amounts 
of any effluents that may be released offsite. There will be no 
significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational or public 
radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regards to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not have any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water 
resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no 
known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with 
the proposed action. 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. Therefore, the environmental impacts of the 
proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The proposed action does not involve the use of any different 
resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental 
Statement for CR-3, dated May 1973 (ADAMS Accession No. ML091520178).

Agencies or Persons Consulted

    The NRC staff did not enter into consultation with any other 
Federal agency or with the State of Florida regarding the environmental 
impact of the proposed action. On January 20, 2015, the Florida state 
representative was notified of this EA and FONSI and did not provide 
any comments.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    The licensee has proposed exemptions from (1) certain requirements 
in 10 CFR 50.47(b) regarding onsite and offsite emergency response 
plans for nuclear power reactors; (2) certain requirements in 10 CFR 
50.47(c)(2) to establish plume exposure and ingestion pathway EP zones 
for nuclear power reactors; and (3) certain requirements in 10 CFR part 
50, appendix E, section IV, which establishes the elements that make up 
the content of emergency plans. The proposed action of granting these 
exemptions would result in the elimination of the requirements for the 
licensee to maintain offsite radiological emergency plans and reduce 
some of the onsite EP activities at CR-3, based on the reduced risks at 
the permanently shutdown and defueled reactor. However, requirements 
for certain onsite capabilities to communicate and coordinate with 
offsite response authorities will be retained.
    Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC conducted the EA for the 
proposed

[[Page 11236]]

action included in Section II of this document and incorporated by 
reference in this finding. On the basis of this EA, the NRC concludes 
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the 
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has decided not 
to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
    This EA and FONSI is based on the licensee's letter dated September 
26, 2013, as supplemented by letters dated March 28, 2014, and August 
28, 2014. Otherwise, there are no other environmental documents 
associated with this review. These documents are available for public 
inspection as indicated above.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 23rd day of February, 2015.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Meena K. Khanna,
Chief, Plant Licensing IV-2 and Decommissioning Transition Branch, 
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2015-04288 Filed 2-27-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P