ML24176A222
| ML24176A222 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 07/12/2024 |
| From: | Christopher Regan NRC/NMSS/DREFS |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML24176A222 (9) | |
Text
[7590-01-P]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-302 and 72-1035; NRC-2024-0124]
Accelerated Decommissioning Partners Crystal River Unit 3, LLC;
Crystal River Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3;
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice; issuance.
SUMMARY
- The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a finding of no
significant impact (FONSI) and accompanying environmental assessment (EA)
regarding the NRCs consideration of a lic ense amendment request by Accelerated
Decommissioning Partners Crystal River Unit 3, LLC (ADP) to approve the License
Termination Plan (LTP) for the Crystal River Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3 (CR3),
located in Citrus County, Florida. If approved, the amendment would add a license
condition to the ADP license reflecting the NRCs approval of its LTP and establishing
criteria for determining when changes to the LTP require prior NRC approval. ADP
would use the LTP to meet the requirements for terminating the license and releasing
the site for unrestricted use. Based on the EA, the NRC staff has concluded that there
will be no significant impacts to environmental resources from the requested license
amendment, and therefore, a FONSI is appropriate.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on July 17, 2024.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2024-0124 when contacting the NRC
about the availability of information regar ding this document. You may obtain publicly
available information related to this document using any of the following methods:
- Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and
search for Docket ID NRC-2024-0124. Address questions about Docket IDs in
Regulations.gov to Stacy Schumann; telephone: 301-415-0624; email:
Stacy.Schumann@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact the individual listed in the
For Further Information Contact section of this document.
- NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly available documents online in the ADAMS Public
Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the
search, select Begin Web-based ADAMS Search. For problems with ADAMS, please
contact the NRCs Public Document Room (P DR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at
301-415-4737, or by email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov. For the convenience of the
reader, instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are provided
in the Availability of Documents section.
- NRCs PDR: The PDR, where you may examine and order copies of publicly
available documents, is open by appointment. To make an appointment to visit the PDR,
please send an email to PDR.Resource@nrc.gov or call 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-
4737, between 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. eastern time (ET), Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amy Minor, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, telephone: 816-200-1454; email: Amy.Hesterminor@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering issuance of a lic ense amendment request to approve the
LTP for the CR3, located in Citrus County, Florida, as part of ADPs part 50 of title 10 of
2 the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Domestic Licensing of Production and
Utilization Facilities, Facility Operating License No. DPR-72. If granted, the license
amendment would add a condition to ADPs lic ense reflecting the NRCs approval of
ADPs LTP and establishing criteria for determining when changes to the LTP require
prior NRC approval. As required by 10 CFR part 51, Environmental Protection
Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions, the NRC
prepared an EA. Based on the results of the EA, the NRC has determined not to prepare
an environmental impact statement for the lic ense amendment request and is issuing a
FONSI.
Construction of the CR3 began in 1968, and the NRC issued an operating
license to Duke Energy Florida (DEF) in 1977. The CR3 began commercial operation in
March 1977. The CR3 stopped operations in 2009 and was officially retired on
February 5, 2013.
On December 2, 2013, DEF submitted a Post-Shutdown Decommissioning
Activities Report (PSDAR) to NRC selecting SAFSTOR as the plant decommissioning
strategy. SAFSTOR is a method of decommissioning in which the nuclear facility is
placed and maintained in a safe stable condition for a number of years until it is
subsequently decontaminated and dismantled to le vels that permit license termination.
During SAFSTOR, a facility is left intact, but the fuel has been removed from the reactor
vessel and radioactive liquids have been dr ained from systems and components and
then processed. Radioactive decay occurs during SAFSTOR period, thus reducing the
quantity of contaminated and radioactive material that must be disposed of during
decontamination and dismantlement. In January 2018, DEF certified to the NRC that
DEF had removed all spent fuel assemblies from the CR3 spent fuel pool and loaded the
3 final storage cask used to store spent fuel at the CR3 Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation.
In 2020, the NRC approved the requested transfer of the CR3 from DEF to ADP
to commence decontamination, dismantlement, and demolition. On October 1, 2020,
ADP updated the PSDAR to change the plant decommissioning strategy from SAFSTOR
to DECON, which is an option for reactor decommissioning in which the equipment,
structures, and portions of a facility and site containing radioactive contaminants are
removed or decontaminated to a level that permits termination of the license shortly after
cessation of operations. ADP submitted the LTP on December 12, 2022, in accordance
with 10 CFR 50.82(a)(9), and submitted an updated LTP on March 29, 2024.
II. Environmental Assessment
Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is the review and subsequent approval, if appropriate, of a
license amendment to ADP to approve the LTP for the CR3. If approved, the
amendment would add a license condition to the ADP license reflecting the NRCs
approval of the LTP and establishing criteria for determining when changes to the LTP
require prior NRC approval. The proposed action is described in ADPs 2022 LTP
application, as supplemented by the updated 2024 LTP, and responses to requests for
additional information dated May 9, 2024.
Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
The purpose of and need for the proposed action is to allow completion of
decommissioning of the CR3 site by ADP, termination of the CR3 operating license by
the NRC, and subsequent release of the site for unrestricted use. The NRC regulation at
10 CFR 50.82 sets forth the process for the licensee to decommission its nuclear power
4 plant, including submission of the LTP. The NRC will approve the LTP, provided that the
LTP meets the criteria in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(10).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC staff considered the potential impacts of the proposed action on land
use; visual and scenic resources/aesthetics; climatology, meteorology, and air quality;
noise; geology and soils; water resources; historic and cultural resources; ecological
resources; socioeconomics; public and occupation health; transportation and traffic;
environmental justice; and waste management. The Decommissioning Generic
Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) (NUREG-0586, Supplement 1, Volume 1)
generically addressed many of the potential environmental impacts of decommissioning
at the CR3. During its review of the LTP, the NRC concluded that the impacts for most
resource areasonsite land use; water resources; air quality; ecology, not including
threatened and endangered species or outside the operational area; socioeconomics;
historic and cultural resources within the operational area; aesthetics; noise; and
transportationwere still bounded by the Decommissioning GEIS. Therefore, the NRC
does not expect impacts associated with these issues beyond those discussed in the
GEIS, which concluded that the impact level for these issues was SMALL.
Although the Decommissioning GEIS did evaluate radioactive waste
management, the NRC staff determined that the GEIS had underestimated the volume
of low-level radioactive waste that the CR3 would produce. Consequently, the NRC staff
determined the effects of the proposed action of radioactive waste management for CR3
on a site-specific basis.
In the Decommissioning GEIS, the NRC staff concluded that it could not
necessarily determine the environmental impac ts of decommissioning generically for six
environmental resource areas (offsite land use, threatened and endangered species,
5 aquatic ecology beyond the operational area, terrestrial ecology beyond the operational
area, environmental justice, and historic and cultural resources beyond the operational
area). The Decommissioning GEIS determined that for these six resource areas a site-
specific analysis would be required as was done in the CR3 EA. In addition, topics not
included in the Decommissioning GEIS t hat the NRC staff evaluated in the CR3 EA
include the affected environment, climate change, cumulative impacts, and
nonradioactive waste management.
In the CR3 EA, the NRC staff evaluated the potential environmental impacts on
the six site-specific environmental resource areas as well as the four resource areas not
evaluated in the Decommissioning GEIS and did not identify any significant impacts. For
the proposed action there are no planned activities outside of the operational area, and
ADP plans to use best management practices and obtain all necessary licenses from
Federal or State agencies to limit potential impacts and protect surrounding lands.
Therefore, the proposed action would result in no significant impacts and there would be
no significant cumulative effects when added to the past, present, or reasonably
foreseeable future actions at the CR3 site.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered the no-action
alternative. Under the no-action alternativ e, the NRC would not approve the LTP or the
license amendment request because regulatory requirements have not been met.
If the NRC was unable to approve the LTP because the regulatory requirements
were not met, ADP would need to take additional actions to prepare an LTP that meets
the requirements in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(10). Under that scenario, ADP would resubmit the
LTP, activities at the CR3 would likely c ontinue, and the environmental impacts would
not change as a result of the additional time required for the LTP resubmission.
6 Agencies and Persons Consulted
On May 20, 2024, the NRC staff provided a copy of the draft EA to the Florida
Department of Health for its review and comment. In a letter dated June 7, 2024, the
State responded with no comments on the draft EA.
NRC staff conducted National Historic Preservation Act consultation pursuant to
36 CFR 800.8(c), including submitting required notification to the Florida State Historic
Preservation Officer (SHPO) and Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). The
NRC staff solicited comments from the public on the historic and cultural resources
sections of the draft EA and findings. Sta ff published the draft sections on the NRC
website and electronically notified the four Federally recognized Indian Tribes with
historic and ancestral ties to the project vicinity, the Florida SHPO, and members of the
public who have indicated their interest in the CR3. No members of the public
commented on the historic and cultural resources sections of the draft EA and findings.
The NRC staff received a response from the Seminole Tribe of Florida indicating that the
Tribe had no objections or other comments. The NRC staff did not receive a response
from the other Indian Tribes it contacted. Staff made a determination of no historic
properties affected and has received SHPO concurrence and no objections from other
parties. The Florida SHPO responded on May 20, 2024, with its concurrence with NRC
staffs determination. The ACHP responded on May 20, 2024, confirming receipt of
NRCs notification pursuant to 36 CFR 800.8(c).
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
Based on its review of the proposed license amendment request, in accordance
with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51, the NRC staff has determined that issuing the
requested amendment, if appropriate, amending ADPs DPR-72 license would not
significantly affect the quality of human env ironment. No significant radiological or non-
7 radiological impacts are expected from the proposed action. Therefore, the NRC staff
has determined that pursuant to 10 CFR 51.31, Determinations based on environmental
assessment, preparation of an EIS is not required for the proposed action, and pursuant
to 10 CFR 51.32, Finding of no significant impact, a FONSI is appropriate. In
accordance with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), this FONSI incorporates the EA set forth in this
notice by reference.
IV. Availability of Documents
The documents identified in the following table are available to interested
persons through ADAMS.
DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION ADAMS ACCESSION NO
ADP CR3, LLC, License Amendment ML22355A441 Request, Addition of License Condition 2.C.21, License Termination Plan, dated December 12, 2022 ADP CR3, LLC, Response to Request for ML24089A036 Additional Information Regarding the LTP, dated March 29, 2024 ADP CR3, LLC, Response to Request for ML24131A075 Additional Information for the EA of the LTP, dated May 9, 2024 Crystal River LTP Environmental ML24081A068 Assessment NUREG-0586, Supplement 1, Volume 1 ML023470304 GEIS on Decommissioning Nuclear Facilities Crystal River Unit 3 - Post-Shutdown ML13340A009 Decommissioning Activities Report, dated December 2, 2013 Crystal River Unit 3 Day Spent Fuel ML18015A006 Cask Registration and Certification of Permanent Removal of All Spent Fuel Assemblies from the Spent Fuel Pools, dated January 15, 2018 Transmittal of Draft EA to Florida ML24143A024 Department of Health, dated May 20, 2024
Florida Department of Health Comments on ML24159A779 Draft EA, dated June 7, 2024
8 Request to initiate Section 106 Consultation ML24054A076 (Package)
Regarding the License Termination Plan for Crystal River, Unit 3, April 2, 2024 Florida SHPO Response to initiate Section ML24143A021 106 Consultation Regarding the License Termination Plan for Crystal River, Unit 3, dated May 20, 2024 ACHP Response to initiate Section 106 ML24143A013 Consultation Regarding the License Termination Plan for Crystal River, Unit 3, dated May 20, 2024 NRC Request for Concurrence with ML24060A086 Endangered Species Act Determinations for Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant License Termination Plan, dated February 29, 2024 Supplemental to Request for Concurrence ML24190A138 with Endangered Species Act Determinations for Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant License Termination Plan, dated June 18, 2024 RAI2 NRC Response to FWS ESA Crystal ML24191A423 River Unit 3 LTP, dated July 3, 2024 FWS Concurrence for Crystal River Unit 3 ML24190A191
Dated: July 12, 2024.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
/RA/
Christopher M. Regan, Director, Division of Rulemaking, Environmental, and Financial Support, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
9