[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 116 (Thursday, June 16, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39285-39287]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14253]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72-06; NRC-2016-0112]
Duke Energy; Brunswick Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact;
issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing an
environmental assessment (EA) and a finding of no significant impact
(FONSI) for its review and approval of the decommissioning funding plan
submitted by Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC (Duke), on December 13, 2012,
for the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) at the
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP) in Brunswick County, North
Carolina.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on
June 16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0112 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-2016-0112. 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. In addition, for the convenience of the
reader, the ADAMS accession numbers are provided in a table in the
section of this document 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.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Baum, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-0018, email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering issuance of the decommissioning funding plan
(DFP) for the Brunswick ISFSI. Duke submitted a DFP for NRC review and
approval by letter dated December 13, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML12353A033). The NRC staff has prepared a Final EA (ADAMS Accession
No. ML16144A362) in support of its review of Duke's DFP, in accordance
with the NRC regulations in part 51 of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ``Environmental Protection Regulations for
Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,'' which implement
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.). Based on the EA, the NRC staff has determined that
approval of the DFP for the Brunswick ISFSI will not significantly
affect the quality of the human environment, and, accordingly, the
staff has concluded that a FONSI is appropriate. The NRC staff further
finds that preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS) is
not warranted because under 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10) or 10 CFR 51.22 (c)(11)
do not apply to the DFP reviews, since the categorical exclusion only
apply to license amendments and the 10 CFR 72.30 DFP reviews and
approvals are not license amendment.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The Brunswick ISFSI is located in Southport, North Carolina. Duke
is authorized by NRC, under License No. SFGL-41, to store spent nuclear
fuel at the Brunswick ISFSI.
The NRC requires its licensees to plan for the eventual
decommissioning of their licensed facilities prior to license
termination. On June 17, 2011, the NRC published a final rule in the
Federal Register amending its decommissioning planning regulations (76
FR 35512). The final rule amended the NRC regulation, 10 CFR 72.30,
which concerns financial assurance and decommissioning for ISFSIs. This
regulation now requires each holder of, or applicant for, a license
under 10 CFR part 72 to submit, for NRC review and approval, a DFP. The
purpose of the DFP is to demonstrate the licensee's financial
[[Page 39286]]
assurance, i.e., that funds will be available to decommission the
ISFSI. The NRC staff is reviewing the DFP submitted by Duke on December
13, 2012. Specifically, the NRC must determine whether Duke's DFP
contains the information required by 10 CFR 72.30(b) and whether Duke
has provided reasonable assurance that funds will be available to
decommission the ISFSI.
Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is the NRC's review and approval of Duke's DFP
submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 72.30(b). To approve the DFP, the
NRC will evaluate whether the decommissioning cost estimate (DCE)
adequately estimates the cost to conduct the required ISFSI
decommissioning activities prior to license termination, including
identification of the volume of onsite subsurface material containing
residual radioactivity that will require remediation to meet the
license termination criteria in 10 CFR 20.1402 or 10 CFR 20.1403. NRC
will also evaluate whether the aggregate dollar amount of Duke's
financial instruments provide adequate financial assurance to cover the
DCE and that the financial instruments meet the criteria of 10 CFR
72.30(e).
The proposed action does not require any changes to the ISFSI's
licensed routine operations, maintenance activities, or monitoring
programs, nor does it require any new construction or land disturbing
activities. The scope of the proposed action concerns only the NRC's
review and approval of the Duke's DFP. The scope of the proposed action
does not include, and will not result in, the review and approval of
any decontamination or decommissioning activity or license termination
for the ISFSI or any other part of BSEP.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action provides a means for Duke to demonstrate that
it will have sufficient funding to cover the costs of decommissioning
the ISFSI, including the reduction of the residual radioactivity at the
ISFSI to the level specified by the applicable NRC license termination
regulations concerning release of the property (10 CFR 20.1402 or 10
CFR 20.1403).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC's approval of the DFP will not change the scope or nature
of the operation of the ISFSI and will not authorize any changes to
licensed operations or maintenance activities. The NRC's approval of
the DFP will not result in any changes in the types, characteristics,
or quantities of radiological or non-radiological effluents released
into the environment from the ISFSI, or result in the creation of any
solid waste. Moreover, the approval of the DFP will not authorize any
construction activity or facility modification. Therefore, the NRC
staff concludes that the approval of the DFP is a procedural and
administrative action that will not result in any significant impact to
the environment.
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended (NHPA), requires federal agencies to consider the effects of
their undertakings on historic properties. In accordance with the NHPA
implementing regulations at 36 CFR part 800, ``Protection of Historic
Properties,'' NRC's approval of Duke's DFP constitutes a federal
undertaking. The NRC, however, has determined that the approval of the
DFP is a type of undertaking that does not have the potential to cause
effects on historic properties, assuming such historic properties were
present, because the NRC's approval of Duke's DFP will not authorize or
result in changes to licensed operations or maintenance activities, or
changes in the types, characteristics, or quantities of radiological or
non-radiological effluents released into the environment from the
ISFSI, or result in the creation of any solid waste. Therefore, in
accordance with 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), no consultation is required under
Section 106 of the NHPA.
Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, prior to
taking a proposed action, a federal agency must determine whether (i)
endangered and threatened species or their critical habitats are known
to be in the vicinity of the proposed action and if so, whether (ii)
the proposed Federal action may affect listed species or critical
habitats. If the proposed action may affect listed species or critical
habitats, the federal agency is required to consult with the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (FWS) and/or the U.S. National Marine Fisheries
Service. In accordance with 50 CFR 402.13, the NRC has engaged in
informal consultation with the FWS. The NRC has determined that the
proposed action is not likely to adversely affect listed species or
their critical habitats because the NRC's approval of Duke's DFP will
not authorize or result in changes to licensed operations or
maintenance activities, or changes in the types, characteristics, or
quantities of radiological or non-radiological effluents released into
the environment from the ISFSI, or result in the creation of any solid
waste. The FWS has concurred with the NRC's determination that the
proposed action is not likely to adversely affect listed species or
critical habitat.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
In addition to the proposed action, the NRC evaluated the no-action
alternative. The no-action alternative is to deny Duke's DFP. A denial
of a DFP that meets the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(b) does not support
the regulatory intent of the 2011 rulemaking. As noted in the
rulemaking EA (ADAMS Accession No. ML090500648), not promulgating the
2011 final rule would have increased the likelihood of additional
legacy sites. Thus, denying the licensee's DFP, which the NRC has found
to meet the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(b), will undermine the licensee's
decommissioning planning. On this basis, the NRC has concluded that the
no-action alternative is not a viable alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC staff consulted with other agencies and parties regarding
the environmental impacts of the proposed action. The NRC provided a
draft of its EA to the North Carolina Department of Health and Human
Services on August 10, 2015, and gave them 30 days to respond. The
State never responded. The NRC also consulted with the FWS. The FWS
concurred with the NRC's determination that the proposed action is not
likely to adversely affect listed species or critical habitat.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action, the review
and approval of the DFP, submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 72.30(b),
will not authorize or result in changes to licensed operations or
maintenance activities, or changes in the types, characteristics, or
quantities of radiological or non-radiological effluents released into
the environment from the ISFSI, or result in the creation of any solid
waste. Moreover, the approval of the DFP will not authorize any
construction activity, facility modification, or any other land-
disturbing activity. The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed
action is a procedural and administrative action and as such, that the
proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of
the human environment. Therefore, the NRC staff has determined not to
prepare an EIS for the proposed action but will issue this FONSI. In
[[Page 39287]]
accordance with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), the FONSI incorporates the EA by
reference.
IV. Availability of Documents
The following documents, related to this Notice, can be found using
any of the methods provided in the following table. Instructions for
accessing ADAMS were provided under the ADDRESSES section of this
Notice.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Document ADAMS Accession No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 13, 2012................ Submission of ML12353A033
Duke's
decommissionin
g funding plan.
February 1, 2009................. Environmental ML090500648
Assessment for
Final Rule--
Decommissionin
g Planning.
May 31, 2016..................... NRC staff's ML16144A362
Final EA for
the approval
of the
decommissionin
g funding plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of June 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Bernard H. White IV,
Acting Branch Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, Division of Spent
Fuel Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2016-14253 Filed 6-15-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P