[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26838-26843]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10429]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499; NRC-2016-0092]


STP Nuclear Operating Company, South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Draft environmental assessment and finding of no significant 
impact; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing for 
public comment a draft environmental assessment (EA) prepared under the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and NRC regulations. 
This EA summarizes the results of the NRC staff's environmental review, 
which evaluates the potential environmental impacts of issuing license 
amendments and granting regulatory exemptions in response to a request 
from STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC, the licensee) for Facility 
Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80, for South Texas Project 
(STP), Units 1 and 2, respectively. The license amendments and 
regulatory exemptions would allow STPNOC to make changes to the STP 
licensing basis to incorporate the use of both a deterministic and a 
risk-informed approach to address safety issues discussed in Generic 
Safety Issue (GSI)-191 and to close Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02.

DATES: Submit comments by June 20, 2016. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission 
is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this 
date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods 
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting 
comments on a specific subject):
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0092. 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.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, 
Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Regner, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-1906, email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0092 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain 
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the 
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0092.
     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]. For 
the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials 
referenced in this document are provided in a table in the section of 
this notice entitled, Availability of Documents.
     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.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2016-0092 in your comment submission.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into 
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be 
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should 
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove such information before making the comment submissions available 
to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

II. Introduction and Background

    The NRC is considering a request to amend Facility Operating 
Licenses NPF-76 and NPF-80, issued to STPNOC for operation of STP, 
Units 1 and 2, located in Matagorda County, Texas, and to grant certain 
regulatory exemptions for STP, Units 1 and 2, in accordance with 
section 50.90, ``Application for amendment of license, construction 
permit, or early site permit'' and section 50.12, ``Specific 
exemptions,'' of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), 
respectively. The license amendments and regulatory exemptions would 
allow STPNOC to resolve concerns associated with GSI-191, ``Assessment 
of Debris Accumulation on PWR [Pressurized-Water Reactor] Sump 
Performance,'' and the associated GL 2004-02, ``Potential Impact of 
Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation during Design Basis 
Accidents at Pressurized-Water

[[Page 26839]]

Reactors,'' issued on September 13, 2004.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, ``Criteria for and identification of 
licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,'' 
the NRC has prepared a draft EA summarizing the findings of its 
environmental NEPA review of this proposed action. The NRC concluded 
that the proposed action will have no significant environmental impact.

Background

    The NRC established a general safety issue (GSI-191) to determine 
whether the transport and accumulation of debris from a loss-of-coolant 
accident in the PWR containment structure would impede the operation of 
the emergency core cooling system or containment spray system. A loss-
of-coolant accident within the containment structure is assumed to be 
caused by a break in the primary coolant loop piping. Water discharged 
from the pipe break would collect on the containment structure floor 
and within the containment emergency sump. During this type of 
accident, the emergency core cooling systems and containment spray 
systems would initially draw cooling water from the refueling water 
storage tank. However, realigning the emergency core cooling system 
pumps to the containment structure emergency sump would provide long-
term cooling of the reactor core. Therefore, successful long-term 
cooling depends on the ability of the containment structure emergency 
sump to provide adequate flow to the residual heat removal 
recirculation pumps for extended periods of time.
    One of the concerns addressed by the implementation of GSI-191 is 
that debris, such as insulation installed on piping and components, 
within the containment structure could be dislodged by a jet of water 
and steam from a loss-of-coolant accident. Water, along with debris, 
would accumulate at the bottom of the containment structure and would 
flow towards the emergency sump pumps. Insulation and other fibrous 
material could block the emergency sump screens and suction strainers, 
which in turn could prevent the ability of the containment emergency 
sump to provide adequate flow to the residual heat removal 
recirculation pumps (for more information, see NUREG-0897, 
``Containment Emergency Sump Performance,'' Revision 1.
    The NRC issued GL 2004-02 to address this safety concern by 
requiring licensees of PWRs to: (1) Increase the size of their 
containment sump strainers, (2) replace fibrous insulation inside 
containment, and (3) implement other compensatory measures in order to 
significantly reduce the risk of emergency sump strainer clogging.
    Subsequent to the issuance of GL 2004-02, the NRC staff identified 
another related concern with the potential for debris to bypass the 
sump strainers (even the new strainers) and enter the reactor core. 
This safety issue could result in the build-up of material on fuel 
assemblies, inhibit heat transfer, and prevent adequate cooling of the 
reactor core. Since 2004, the NRC and industry have conducted tests to 
gain more information on this concern. In 2012, the NRC staff developed 
three options for resolution of all of its debris concerns, which are 
discussed in SECY-12-0093, ``Closure Options for Generic Safety Issue 
191, Assessment of Debris Accumulation on Pressurized-Water Reactor 
Sump Performance,'' dated July 9, 2012.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On December 14, 2012, the Commission approved all three 
options for closure of this safety issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The three options for demonstrating compliance with 10 CFR 50.46, 
``Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light-
water nuclear power reactors,'' are summarized as follows.
    1. Option 1 allows the use of approved models and test methods.
    2. Option 2 allows the industry to implement additional mitigating 
measures until resolution is completed and take additional time to 
resolve issues through further industry testing or use of a risk-
informed approach. Use of this option has two alternative methods.
     Option 2A: Industry can perform more testing and analysis 
and submit a topical report for NRC review and approval.
     Option 2B: Industry can develop a risk-informed approach 
to quantify the risk associated with this generic issue and submit a 
license amendment request for NRC review and approval.
    3. Option 3 allows industry to separate the regulatory treatment of 
the sump strainer and in-vessel effects. The emergency core cooling 
system strainers will be evaluated using currently approved models, 
while in-vessel effects will be addressed using a risk-informed 
approach.
    STPNOC proposes to use Option 2B to demonstrate compliance with 10 
CFR 50.46 through both plant-specific testing and a risk-informed 
approach (described in more detail in the following paragraphs). Since 
the use of a risk-informed approach is not recognized in the 
regulations, STPNOC requested an exemption to 10 CFR 50.46(a)(1) for 
certain conditions associated with the treatment of debris. 
Additionally, STPNOC requested exemptions to appendix A to 10 CFR part 
50, General Design Criteria (GDC) 35, ``Emergency Core Cooling,'' GDC 
38, ``Containment Heat Removal,'' and GDC 41, ``Containment Atmosphere 
Cleanup,'' to allow its use of a risk-informed approach for certain 
conditions in the containment debris analysis. If approved, the 
proposed action would not result in modifications within the 
containment structure or changes to the emergency core cooling system.

III. Draft Environmental Assessment

Description of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to issue certain license amendments and to 
grant certain regulatory exemptions requested by STPNOC. The license 
amendments and regulatory exemptions would allow STPNOC to make changes 
to the STP licensing basis to incorporate the use of both a 
deterministic and a risk-informed approach to address safety issues 
discussed in GSI-191 and close GL 2004-02. If approved, no physical 
modifications to the nuclear plant or changes to reactor operations 
involving the emergency core cooling system would be required. The 
proposed action is in response to the licensee's application dated June 
19, 2013, and supplemented by letters dated October 3, October 31, 
November 13, November 21, and December 23, 2013 (two letters); January 
9, February 13, February 27, March 17, March 18, May 15 (two letters), 
May 22, June 25, and July 15, 2014; and March 10, March 25, and August 
20, 2015.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    As the holder of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80, 
STPNOC is expected to address the safety issues discussed in GSI-191 
and to close GL 2004-02 with respect to STP, Units 1 and 2. Consistent 
with SECY-12-0093, STPNOC chose an approach which requires, in part, 
that STPNOC request that the NRC amend the operating licenses and grant 
certain regulatory exemptions for each unit.

Plant Site and Environs

    The STP is located on approximately 12,220 acres (4,945 hectares) 
in rural and sparsely populated Matagorda County, Texas, approximately 
70 miles (mi) [110 kilometers (km)] south-southwest of Houston. Nearby 
communities include Matagorda, approximately 8 mi (13 km) south of the 
site; the City of Palacios, 11 mi (18 km)

[[Page 26840]]

west of the site; and Bay City, 13 mi (21 km) north of the site.
    The STP power plant consists of two four-loop Westinghouse PWR 
units. The reactor core of each unit heats water, which is pumped to 
four steam generators, where the heated water is converted to steam. 
The steam is then used to turn turbines, which are connected to 
electrical generators that produce electricity. A simplified drawing of 
a PWR can be viewed at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/pwrs.html.
    The reactor, steam generators, and other components are housed in a 
concrete and steel containment structure (building). The containment 
structure is a reinforced concrete cylinder with a concrete slab base 
and hemispherical dome. A welded steel liner is attached to the inside 
face of the concrete shell to ensure a high degree of leak tightness. 
In addition, the 4-foot (1.2-meter)-thick concrete walls of the 
containment structure serve as a radiation shield. Additional 
information on the plant structures and systems, as well as the 
environmental impact statement for license renewal, can be found in 
NUREG-1437, Supplement 48, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for 
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplement 48 Regarding South Texas 
Project, Units 1 and 2.''

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Radiological and non-radiological impacts on the environment that 
may result from issuing the license amendments and granting the 
regulatory exemptions are summarized in the following sections.

Non-Radiological Impacts

    No physical modifications to the nuclear plant or changes to 
reactor operations involving the emergency core cooling system would be 
required if the NRC were to issue the requested license amendments and 
grant the regulatory exemptions. Also, no physical changes would be 
made to other structures or land use within the STP site. Non-
radiological liquid effluents or gaseous emissions would not change and 
therefore environmental conditions at the STP site also would not 
change. In addition, issuing the license amendments and granting the 
regulatory exemptions would not result in changes to the use of 
resources or cause any new environmental impacts.
    Therefore, there would be no non-radiological environmental impacts 
to any resource or any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of 
resources.

Non-Radiological Cumulative Impacts

    Since issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions would not result in environmental effects, there would be no 
cumulative impact.

Radiological Impacts

Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluents and Solid Waste

    The STP uses waste treatment systems to collect, process, recycle, 
and dispose of gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes that contain 
radioactive material in a safe and controlled manner within NRC and 
Environmental Protection Agency radiation safety standards. Issuing the 
license amendments and granting the regulatory exemptions will not 
result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant or reactor 
operations that would affect the types and quantities of radioactive 
material generated during plant operations; therefore, there will be no 
changes to the plant radioactive waste treatment systems. A detailed 
description of the STP radioactive waste handling and disposal 
activities is contained in Chapter 2.1.2 of Supplement 48 to NUREG-
1437.

Radioactive Gaseous Effluents

    The objectives of the STP gaseous waste management system (GWMS) 
are to process and control the release of radioactive gaseous effluents 
into the environment to be within the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1301, 
``Dose limits for individual members of the public,'' and to be 
consistent with the as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) dose 
objectives set forth in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50. The GWMS is 
designed so that radiation exposure to plant workers is within the dose 
limits in 10 CFR 20.1201, ``Occupational dose limits for adults.''
    Issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions will not result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant 
or reactor operations; therefore, there will be no changes to the GWMS. 
The existing equipment and plant procedures that control radioactive 
releases to the environment will continue to be used to maintain 
radioactive gaseous releases within the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 
and the ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.

Radioactive Liquid Effluents

    The function of the STP liquid waste processing system (LWPS) is to 
collect and process radioactive liquid wastes to reduce radioactivity 
and chemical concentrations to levels acceptable for discharge to the 
environment or to recycle the liquids for use in plant systems. The 
principal objectives of the LWPS are to collect liquid wastes that may 
contain radioactive material and to maintain sufficient processing 
capability so that liquid waste may be discharged to the environment 
below the regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 and consistent with the 
ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50. The waste is 
routed through a monitor that measures the radioactivity and can 
automatically terminate the release in the event radioactivity exceeds 
predetermined levels. The liquid waste is discharged into the main 
cooling reservoir. The entire main cooling reservoir is within the STP 
site boundary and the public is prohibited from access to the area.
    Issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions will not result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant 
or reactor operations; therefore, there will be no changes to the LWPS. 
The existing equipment and plant procedures that control radioactive 
releases to the environment will continue to be used to maintain 
radioactive liquid releases within the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 
and the ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.

Radioactive Solid Wastes

    The function of the STP solid waste processing system (SWPS) is to 
process, package, and store the solid radioactive wastes generated by 
nuclear plant operations until they are shipped off site to a vendor 
for further processing or for permanent disposal at a licensed burial 
facility, or both. The storage areas have restricted access and 
shielding to reduce radiation rates to plant workers. The principal 
objectives of the SWPS are to package and transport the waste in 
compliance with NRC regulations in 10 CFR part 61, ``Licensing 
Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste,'' and 10 CFR part 
71, ``Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material,'' and the 
U.S. Department of Transportation regulations in 49 CFR parts 170 
through 179; and to maintain the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201, 10 CFR 
20.1301, and appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.
    Issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions will not result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant 
or reactor operations; therefore, the waste can be handled by the SWPS 
without modification. The existing equipment and plant procedures that 
control radioactive solid waste handling will continue to be used to 
maintain exposures within the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201, 10 CFR

[[Page 26841]]

20.1301, and 10 CFR part 50 appendix I.

Occupational Radiation Doses

    The proposed action of issuing the license amendments and granting 
the regulatory exemptions will not result in any physical changes being 
made to the nuclear plant or reactor operations; therefore, there will 
be no change to any in-plant radiation sources. The licensee's 
radiation protection program monitors radiation levels throughout the 
nuclear plant to establish appropriate work controls, training, 
temporary shielding, and protective equipment requirements so that 
worker doses will remain within the dose limits of 10 CFR part 20, 
subpart C, ``Occupational Dose Limits.'' Issuing the license amendments 
and granting the regulatory exemptions will not change radiation levels 
within the nuclear plant and, therefore, will have no increased 
radiological impact to the workers.

Offsite Radiation Dose

    The primary sources of offsite dose to members of the public from 
the STP are radioactive gaseous and liquid effluents. As discussed 
previously, there will be no change to the operation of the STP 
radioactive gaseous and liquid waste management systems or the ability 
to perform their intended functions. Also, there will be no change to 
the STP radiation monitoring system and procedures used to control the 
release of radioactive effluents in accordance with radiation 
protection standards in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR 190, ``Environmental 
Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations,'' and the 
ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.
    Based on the previous statements, the offsite radiation dose to 
members of the public would not change and would continue to be within 
regulatory limits, and, therefore, issuing the license amendments and 
granting the regulatory exemptions will not change offsite dose levels 
and, consequently, the health effects of the proposed action will not 
be significant.

Design-Basis Accidents

    Design-basis accidents at STP, Units 1 and 2, are evaluated by both 
the licensee and the NRC to ensure that the units can withstand the 
spectrum of postulated accidents without undue hazard to the public 
health and safety and the protection of the environment.
    Separate from its environmental review in this EA, the NRC staff is 
evaluating the licensee's technical and safety analyses provided in 
support of the proposed action of issuing the license amendments and 
granting the exemption requests to ensure that, following the proposed 
action, the licensee will continue to meet the NRC regulatory 
requirements for safe operation. The results and conclusion of the NRC 
staff's safety review will be documented in a publicly available safety 
evaluation. If the NRC staff concludes in this safety evaluation that 
taking the proposed action will (1) provide reasonable assurance that 
the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation 
in the proposed manner, (2) provide reasonable assurance that such 
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's 
regulations, and (3) not be inimical to the common defense and security 
or to the health and safety of the public, then the proposed action 
will also not have a significant environmental impact. The NRC will not 
take the proposed action absent such a safety conclusion.

Radiological Cumulative Impacts

    The radiological dose limits for protection of the public and plant 
workers have been developed by the NRC and the Environmental Protection 
Agency to address the cumulative impact of acute and long-term exposure 
to radiation and radioactive material. These dose limits are codified 
in 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation,'' and 
40 CFR part 190.
    Cumulative radiation doses are required to be within the limits set 
forth in the regulations cited in the previous paragraph. Issuing the 
license amendments and granting the exemptions will not require any 
physical changes to the plant or plant activities, there will not be 
changes to in-plant radiation sources, and offsite radiation dose to 
members of the public will not change. Therefore, the NRC staff 
concludes that there would not be a significant cumulative radiological 
impact from the proposed action.

Radiological Impacts Summary

    Based on these radiological evaluations, the proposed action of 
issuing the license amendments and granting the exemptions would not 
result in any significant radiological impacts. Therefore, if the NRC 
staff concludes in its separate safety evaluation that taking the 
proposed action will (1) provide reasonable assurance that the health 
and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the 
proposed manner, (2) provide reasonable assurance that such activities 
will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and 
(3) not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health 
and safety of the public, then the proposed action will not have a 
significant radiological impact.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
    As discussed earlier, licensees have options in responding to GL 
2004-02 and demonstrating compliance with 10 CFR 50.46 to consider the 
impacts of debris on emergency core cooling system. Consistent with 
these options, as an alternative to the proposed action, the licensee 
could choose to remove and replace insulation within the reactor 
containment building. This would require the physical removal and 
disposal of significant amounts of insulation from a radiation area 
within the reactor containment building and the installation of new 
insulation less likely to impact sump performance.
    Removal of the existing insulation from the containment building 
would generate radiologically contaminated waste. STPNOC estimated that 
4,620 cubic feet of insulation would be removed and stored onsite until 
disposal. The old insulation would require special handling and 
packaging so that it could be safely transported from the STP site. The 
licensee's existing low-level radioactive and hazardous waste handling 
and disposal activities would likely be used to process and store this 
waste material. The old insulation would then be transported to a low-
level radioactive or hazardous waste disposal site. Energy (fuel) would 
be expended to transport the insulation and land would be expended at 
the disposal site.
    The removal of the old insulation and installation of the new 
insulation would expose workers to radiation. In its application, 
STPNOC estimates that this would result in an additional collective 
radiation exposure of 158-176 person-roentgen equivalent man (rem) over 
its baseline collective radiation exposure. The NRC staff reviewed 
NUREG-0713, Volume 34, ``Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial 
Nuclear Power Reactors and Other Facilities 2012: Forty-Fifth Annual 
Report,'' and determined that STPNOC's average baseline collective 
radiation exposure is approximately 90 person-rem. This additional 158-
176 person-rem collective exposure would be shared across the entire 
work force involved with removing and reinstalling insulation.
    In SECY-12-0093, the NRC staff attempted to develop a total 
occupational dose estimate for the work

[[Page 26842]]

involved in insulation removal and replacement associated with GSI-191. 
Due to uncertainties in the scope of work required to remove and 
replace insulation at a specific nuclear plant and other site-specific 
factors such as source term and hazardous materials, the NRC staff was 
unable to estimate the total occupational dose associated with this 
work. However, dose estimates were provided by the Nuclear Energy 
Institute (NEI) in a letter to the NRC dated March 30, 2012, based on 
information collected on occupational radiation exposures that have 
been, or could be, incurred during insulation removal and replacement. 
In the letter, NEI noted similar difficulties to those experienced by 
the NRC staff in estimating the potential amount of radiation exposure, 
but provided a ``per unit'' estimate of between 80 to 525 person-rem. 
The NRC staff ultimately concluded, given the uncertainties in the 
scope of work and other nuclear plant site-specific factors such as 
source term and hazardous materials, that there was no basis to 
conclude that the NEI estimates were unreasonable. Therefore, since 
STPNOC's estimate of radiation exposure for insulation removal and 
replacement is within the NEI estimated range, the NRC staff considers 
STPNOC's estimate of an increase of 158-176 person-rem over the 
baseline exposure to be reasonable.
    As stated in the ``Occupational Radiation Doses'' section of this 
document, STPNOC's radiation protection program monitors radiation 
levels throughout the nuclear plant to establish appropriate work 
controls, training, temporary shielding, and protective equipment 
requirements so that worker doses are expected to remain within the 
dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201.
    In addition, as stated in the ``Offsite Radiation Dose'' section of 
this document, STPNOC also has a radiation monitoring system and 
procedures in place to control the release of radioactive effluents in 
accordance with radiation protection standards in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 
CFR part 190, and the ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR 
part 50. Therefore, radiation exposure to members of the public would 
be maintained within the NRC dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR 
part 190, and the ALARA dose objectives of appendix I to 10 CFR part 
50.

Conclusion

    Based on this information, impacts to members of the public from 
removing and replacing insulation within the reactor containment 
building would not be significant. However, impacts to plant workers 
and the environment from implementing this alternative would be greater 
than implementing the proposed action.
Alternative Use of Resources
    The proposed action would not involve the use of any different 
resources (e.g., water, air, land, nuclear fuel) not previously 
considered in NUREG-1437, Supplement 48.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
    In accordance with its stated policy, on April 7, 2016, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Texas State official, Mr. Robert Free, 
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The state 
official concurred with the EA and finding of no significant impact.

IV. Draft Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC is considering STPNOC's requests to amend Facility 
Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80 for STP, Units 1 and 2, and to 
grant exemptions for STP, Units 1 and 2, from certain requirements of 
10 CFR 50.46(a)(1), and 10 CFR part 50, appendix A, GDCs 35, 38, and 
41. This proposed action would not result in changes to radioactive 
effluents or emissions to nuclear plant workers and members of the 
public or any changes to radiological and non-radiological impacts to 
the environment. Therefore, the NRC has concluded that implementing the 
proposed action would result in no significant environmental effects, 
and that a draft Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. The 
NRC's draft EA, included in section III, ``Draft Environmental 
Assessment,'' of this document, is incorporated by reference into this 
finding.
    On the basis of the 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 determined not to prepare an 
environmental impact statement for the proposed action.

V. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available for 
public inspection through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) or by using one of the methods discussed in 
Section I.A, ``Obtaining Information,'' of this document.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Title                     Date        ADAMS Accession No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-0897, Containment Emergency          10/1985  ML112440046.
 Sump Performance: Technical
 Findings Related to Unresolved
 Safety Issue A-43, Revision 1.
NRC Generic Letter 2004-02,              9/13/2004  ML042360586.
 Potential Impact of Debris
 Blockage on Emergency
 Recirculation During Design Basis
 Accidents at Pressurized-Water
 Reactors.
NEI letter to NRC, Nuclear Energy       03/30/2012  ML12095A319.
 Institute, GSI-191 Dose Estimates.
Commission SECY-12-0093, Closure        07/09/2012  ML121320270
 Options for Generic Safety Issue-                   (package).
 191, Assessment of Debris
 Accumulation on Pressurized-Water
 Reactor Sump Performance.
Commission SRM-SECY-12-0093, Staff      12/14/2012  ML12349A378.
 Requirements--SECY-12-0093--Closu
 re Options for Generic Safety
 Issue-191, Assessment of Debris
 Accumulation on Pressurized-Water
 Reactor Sump Performance.
STPNOC letter to NRC, STP Pilot         01/31/2013  ML13043A013.
 Submittal and Request for
 Exemption for a Risk-Informed
 Approach to Resolve Generic
 Safety Issue (GSI)-191.
NRC letter to STPNOC, South Texas       04/01/2013  ML13066A519.
 Project, Units 1 and 2--
 Supplemental Information Needed
 for Acceptance of Requested
 Licensing Action Re: Request for
 Exemption for a Risk-Informed
 Approach to Resolve Generic
 Safety Issue 191.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Revised STP       06/19/2013  ML131750250
 Pilot Submittal and Requests for                    (package).
 Exemptions and License Amendment
 for a Risk-Informed Approach to
 Resolving Generic Safety Issue
 (GSI)-191.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Corrections       10/03/2013  ML13295A222.
 to Information Provided in
 Revised STP Pilot Submittal and
 Requests for Exemptions and
 License Amendment for a Risk-
 Informed Approach to Resolving
 Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191.

[[Page 26843]]

 
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      10/31/2013  ML13323A673
 GSI-191 Chemical Effects Test                       (package).
 Reports.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 1      11/13/2013  ML13323A128
 to Revised STP Pilot Submittal                      (package).
 and Requests for Exemptions and
 License Amendment for a Risk-
 Informed Approach to Resolving
 Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 1      11/21/2013  ML13338A165.
 to Revised STP Pilot Submittal
 for a Risk-Informed Approach to
 Resolving Generic Safety Issue
 (GSI)-191 to Supersede and
 Replace the Revised Pilot
 Submittal.
NUREG-1437, Supplement 48, Generic         11/2013  ML13322A890.
 Environmental Impact Statement
 for License Renewal of Nuclear
 Plants: Supplement 48 Regarding
 South Texas Project, Units 1 and
 2: Final Report.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       12/23/2013  ML14015A312.
 STP-GSI-191 EMCB-RAI-1.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       12/23/2013  ML14015A311.
 NRC Request for Reference
 Document For STP Risk-Informed
 GSI-191 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       03/17/2014  ML14086A383
 NRC Accident Dose Branch Request                    (package).
 for Additional Information.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       01/09/2014  ML14029A533.
 Request for Additional
 Information re Use of RELAP5 in
 Analyses for Risk-Informed GSI-
 191 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      02/13/2014  ML14052A110
 CASA Grande Code and Analyses for                   (package, portions
 STP's Risk-Informed GSI-191                         redacted).
 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      02/27/2014  ML14072A075
 GSI-191 Chemical Effects Test                       (package).
 Reports.
NRC Letter to STPNOC, Request for       04/15/2014  ML14087A075.
 Additional Information, Round 1.
NUREG-0713, Volume 34,                     04/2014  ML14126A597.
 Occupational Radiation Exposure
 at Commercial Nuclear Power
 Reactors and Other Facilities
 2012: Forty-Fifth Annual Report.
NRC letter to STPNOC, Request for       03/03/2015  ML14357A171.
 Additional Information, Round 2.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Second            05/15/2014  ML14149A354.
 Submittal of CASA Grande Source
 Code for STP's Risk-Informed GSI-
 191 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, First Set of      05/22/2014  ML14149A439
 Responses to April, 2014,                           (package).
 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSl-191 Licensing
 Application--Revised.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Second Set        06/25/2014  ML14178A467
 of Responses to April, 2014,                        (package).
 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSI-191 Licensing
 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Third Set of      07/15/2014  ML14202A045.
 Responses to April, 2014,
 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSI-191 Licensing
 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      03/10/2015  ML15072A092.
 Updated CASA Grande Input for
 STP's Risk-Informed GSI-191
 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Description       03/25/2015  ML15091A440.
 of Revised Risk-Informed
 Methodology and Responses to
 Round 2 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSI-191 Licensing
 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 2      08/20/2015  ML15246A125
 to STP Pilot Submittal and                          (package).
 Requests for Exemptions and
 License Amendment for a Risk-
 Informed Approach to Address
 Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191
 and Respond to Generic Letter
 (GL) 2004-02.
NRC letter to STPNOC, Request for       04/11/2016  ML16082A507.
 Additional Information, Round 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of April 2016.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert J. Pascarelli,
Chief, Plant Licensing Branch IV-I, Division of Operating Reactor 
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2016-10429 Filed 5-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P