ML071040021
| ML071040021 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 06/25/2001 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML071040021 (2) | |
Text
33716 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2001 / Notices June 19, 2001. NUCLEAR REGULATORY has been previously evaluated by the Beth M. McCormick, COMMISSION U.S. Atomic Energy Commission in the Advisory Committee Management Officer, Final Environmental Statement Related
[Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388] to Operation of Susquehanna Steam National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
PPL Susquehanna, LLC; Susquehanna Electric Station, Units 1 and 2, dated
[FR Doc. 01-15867 Filed 6-22-01; 8:45 am] June 1981. In this evaluation, the staff Steam Electric Station Environmental BILLING CODE 7510-01-P considered the potential doses due to Assessment and Finding of No postulated accidents for the site, at the Significant Impact site boundary, and to the population NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory within 50 miles of the site. With regard SPACE ADMINISTRATION Commission (NRC) is considering to consequences of postulated accidents, issuance of amendments to Facility the licensee has reevaluated the current
[Notice (01-081)]
Operating License (FOL) Nos. NPF-14, design basis accidents (DBAs) in its NASA Advisory Council (NAC), Space and NPF-22, issued to PPL application for license amendments and Science Advisory Committee (SScAC, Susquehanna, LLC (the licensee), for determined that accident source terms Sun-Earth Connection Advisory operation of the Susquehanna Steam are based on core power levels that Subcommittee Electric Station (SSES), Units 1 and 2, bound the proposed core power level of located in Luzerne County, 3489 MWt. Therefore, the current AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Pennsylvania. analyses bound the potential doses due Space Administration. to DBAs based on the proposed 1.4 ACTION: Notice of Meeting.
Environmental Assessment percent increased core power level. No Identification of the Proposed Action increase in the probability of these
SUMMARY
- In accordance with the accidents is expected to occur.
Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. The proposed license amendment With regard to normal releases, the L.92-463, as amended, the National would revise the FOLs and Technical licensee has calculated the potential Aeronautics and Space Administration Specifications (TS) of SSES, Units 1 and impact on the radiological effluents announces a forthcoming meeting of the 2, to allow the licensee to increase the from the proposed 1.4 percent increase NASA Advisory Council, Space Science licensed core power level from 3441 in power level. The licensee concluded Advisory Committee, Sun-Earth MWt to 3489 MWt, which represents a that the offsite doses from normal Connection Advisory Subcommittee. 1.4 percent increase in the allowable effluent releases remain significantly DATES: Monday, July 23, 2001, 8:30 a.m.
thermal power. SSES Unit 1 was granted below the bounding limits of Title 10 of to 6 p.m.; Tuesday, July 24, 2001, 8:30 conditional authorization for power the Code of Federal Regulations (10 a.m. to 5 p.m. production by its FOL issued on July 17, CFR), Part 50, Appendix I. Normal 1982. Full power operation of Unit 1 at annual average gaseous releases remain ADDRESSES: National Aeronautics and 3,293 MWt core power was authorized limited to a small fraction of 10 CFR Space Administration, Conference by Amendment No. 5 to the FOL, issued Room 6H46, 300 E Street, SW, Part 20, Appendix B, Table 2 limits. The on November 12, 1982. Amendment No. licensee evaluated the effects of power Washington, DC, 20546. 143 to the FOL, issued on March 22, uprate on the radiation sources within FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. 1995, authorized a power uprate for the plant and the radiation levels during George L. Withbroe, Code S, National Unit 1 to 3,441 MWt. SSES Unit 2 was normal operating conditions. Post-Aeronautics and Space Administration, granted conditional authorization for operation radiation levels are expected Washington, DC 20546, 202/358-2150. power production by its FOL issued on to increase slightly due to the power SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The March 23, 1984. Full power operation of uprate; but are expected to have no meeting will be open to the public up Unit 2 at 3,293 MWt core power was significant effect on the plant.
to the capacity of the room. The agenda authorized by Amendment No. 1 to the Occupational doses for normal for the meeting includes the following FOL, issued on June 27, 1984. operations will be maintained within topics: Amendment No. 103 to the FOL, issued acceptable limits by the site ALARA (as-State of the Sun-Earth Connection on April 11, 1994, authorized a power low-as-reasonably-acheivable) program.
Theme uprate for Unit 2 to 3,441 MWt. Solid and liquid waste production may Geospace Management Operations The proposed action is in accordance increase slightly as a result of the Working Group with the licensees application for proposed 1.4 percent uprate; however, Living With a Star Science license amendment dated October 30, waste processing systems are expected Architecture Committee 2000, as supplemented by letters dated to operate within their design Solar/Heliospheric Management February 5, May 22, and May 31, 2001. requirements.
Operation Working Group The NRC has completed its evaluation The Need for the Proposed Action of the proposed action and concludes Report of Discipline Scientists It is imperative that the meeting be The proposed action would allow an that the proposed action will not held on these dates to accommodate the increase in power generation at SSES, increase the probability or consequences scheduling priorities of the key Units 1 and 2, to provide additional of accidents, no changes are being made participants. Visitors will be requested electrical power for distribution to the in the types of effluents that may be to sign a visitors register. grid. Power uprate has been widely released offsite, and there is no recognized by the industry as a safe and significant increase in occupational or Dated: June 19, 2001. cost-effective method to increase public radiation exposure. Therefore, Beth M. McCormick, generating capacity. there are no significant radiological Advisory Committee Management Officer, environmental impacts associated with National Aeronautics and Space Environmental Impacts of the Proposed the proposed action.
Administration. Action With regard to potential non-
[FR Doc. 01-15868 Filed 6-22-01; 8:45 am] The environmental impact associated radiological impacts, the proposed BILLING CODE 7510-01-P with operation of SSES, Units 1 and 2, action does not involve any historic VerDate 11<MAY>2000 15:24 Jun 22, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 25JNN1
Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 122 / Monday, June 25, 2001 / Notices 33717 sites. With regard to thermal discharges Finding of No Significant Impact requires that pressure-temperature (P-T) to the Susquehanna River, the staff has On the basis of the environmental limits be established for reactor pressure previously evaluated temperature effects assessment, the NRC concludes that the vessels (RPVs) during normal operating during normal operations at full power proposed action will not have a and hydrostatic or leak rate testing and determined the temperature impact significant effect on the quality of the conditions. Specifically, 10 CFR Part 50, on the river to be insignificant. The human environment. Accordingly, the Appendix G, states, The appropriate licensee indicated that an increase in NRC has determined not to prepare an requirements on both the pressure-the cooling tower air flow rate will environmental impact statement for the temperature limits and the minimum compensate for the slight increase in proposed action. permissible temperature must be met for condenser outlet circulating water For further details with respect to the all conditions. The purpose of 10 CFR temperature, such that no perceptible proposed action, see the licensees letter Part 50, Appendix G, is to protect the change in the temperature of the cooling dated October 30, 2000, as integrity of the reactor coolant pressure tower basin blowdown to the supplemented by letters dated February boundary in nuclear power plants. This Susquehanna River is expected. 5, May 22, and May 31, 2001. is accomplished through these Therefore, the temperature effects on the Documents may be examined, and/or regulations that, in part, specify fracture river will be insignificant. Existing copied for a fee, at the NRCs Public toughness requirements for ferritic administrative controls ensure the Document Room, located at One White materials of the reactor coolant pressure Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first boundary. Appendix G of 10 CFR Part conduct of adequate monitoring such floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 50 specifies that the requirements for that appropriate actions can be taken to available records will be accessible these limits are the American Society of preclude exceeding the limits imposed electronically from the Agencywide Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler by the National Pollution Discharge Documents Access and Management and Pressure Vessel Code (Code),
Elimination System permit. No Systems (ADAMS) Public Electronic Section XI, Appendix G Limits.
additional requirements or other The proposed action would exempt changes are required as a result of the Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC web site, http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ HCGS from application of specific power uprate. No other non-radiological requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, impacts are associated with the ADAMS/index.html. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are Appendix G, and would substitute use proposed action. of ASME Code Cases N-588 and N-640 problems in accessing the documents Based upon the above, the NRC located in ADAMS, contact the NRC as alternatives pursuant to 10 CFR concludes that the proposed action does Public Document Room (PDR) Reference 50.60(b).
not affect non-radiological plant staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 The proposed action is in accordance effluents and has no other or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. with the licensees application for environmental impact. Therefore, there exemption dated December 1, 2000, as Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day supplemented by letters dated February are no significant non-radiological of June 2001.
environmental impacts associated with 12, May 7, and May 14, 2001.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
the proposed action. The Need for the Proposed Action Richard P. Correia, Accordingly, the NRC concludes that Acting Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate The proposed action is needed to there are no significant environmental I, Division of Licensing Project Management, allow the licensee to implement ASME impacts associated with the proposed Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Code Cases N-588 and N-640 in order action. [FR Doc. 01-15815 Filed 6-22-01; 8:45 am] to revise the method used to determine Alternatives to the Proposed Action BILLING CODE 7590-01-P the P-T limits.
Code Case N-588, Alternative to As an alternative to the proposed Reference Flaw Orientation of Appendix action, the staff considered denial of the NUCLEAR REGULATORY G for Circumferential Welds in Reactor proposed action (i.e., the no-action COMMISSION Vessels,Section XI, Division 1, amends alternative). Denial of the application [Docket No. 50-354]
the provisions of the 1989 Edition of would result in no change in current ASME Section XI, Appendix G, by environmental impacts. The PSEG Nuclear LLC; Hope Creek permitting the postulation of a environmental impacts of the proposed Generating Station Environmental circumferentially oriented reference action and the alternative action are Assesment and Finding of No flaw as the limiting flaw in a RPV similar. Significant Impact circumferential weld for the purpose of establishing RPV P-T limits. The 1989 Alternative Use of Resources The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Edition of ASME Section XI, Appendix Commission (NRC) is considering G, would require that such a reference This action does not involve the use issuance of an exemption from certain flaw be postulated as an axially oriented of any resources not previously requirements of Title 10 of the Code of flaw in the circumferential weld. The considered in the Final Environmental Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, licensee addressed the technical Statement for the SSES, Units 1 and 2. Appendix G, for Facility Operating justification for this exemption by citing License No. NPF-57, issued to PSEG industry experience and aspects of RPV Agencies and Persons Consulted Nuclear LLC, (the licensee) for operation fabrication which support the In accordance with its stated policy, of the Hope Creek Generating Station postulation of circumferentially on June 19, 2001, the staff consulted (HCGS), located in Salem County, New oriented flaws for these welds. The with the Pennsylvania State official, Mr. Jersey. reference flaw is a postulated flaw that Michael Murphy of the Pennsylvania Environmental Assessment accounts for the possibility of a prior Department of Environmental existing defect that may have gone Protection, regarding the environmental Identification of the Proposed Action undetected during the fabrication impact of the proposed action. The State Title 10 of the Code of Federal process. Postulating the Appendix G official had no comments. Regulations, Part 50, Appendix G, reference flaw in a circumferential weld VerDate 11<MAY>2000 15:24 Jun 22, 2001 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\25JNN1.SGM pfrm07 PsN: 25JNN1