[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 166 (Friday, August 26, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53497-53498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-21901]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2011-0194; Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389]


Florida Power and Light Company; St. Lucie Plant, Units 1 and 2; 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) part 50, Appendix G, Section IV.A.2, for Facility 
Operating License Nos. DPR-67 and NPF-16, issued to Florida Power and 
Light Company, et al. (the licensee, FPL), for operation of St. Lucie 
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, located on Hutchinson Island in St. Lucie 
County, Florida. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC 
performed an environmental assessment. Based on the results of the 
environmental assessment, the NRC is issuing a finding of no 
significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would approve an exemption for St. Lucie 
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2, from certain requirements of 10 CFR part 
50, Appendix G, ``Fracture Toughness Requirements.'' Specifically, the 
licensee requests approval of an exemption from the requirements of 10 
CFR part 50, Appendix G, Section IV.A.2, ``Pressure-Temperature Limits 
and Minimum Temperature Requirements.''
    The methodology developed by Combustion Engineering to calculate 
reactor coolant system (RCS) pressure-temperature (P-T) curves, heatup 
and cooldown limits and low temperature overpressure protection (LTOP) 
requirements is documented in topical report CE NPSD-683-A (Agencywide 
Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. 
ML011350387). The staff noted in its March 16, 2001 safety evaluation 
for this report that: ``The CE [Combustion Engineering] NSSS [nuclear 
steam supply system] methodology does not invoke the methods in the 
1995 edition of Appendix G to the Code for calculating KIM 
factors, and instead applies FEM [finite element modeling] methods for 
estimating the KIM factors for the RPV shell * * * Except 
for loading inputs, the staff has determined that the KIM 
calculation methods apply FEM modeling that is similar to that used for 
the determination of the KIT factors. The staff has also 
determined that there is only a slight non-conservative difference 
between the P-T limits generated from the 1989 edition of Appendix G to 
the Code and those generated from CE NSSS methodology as documented in 
Evaluation No. 063-PENG-ER-096, Revision 00. The staff considers this 
difference to be reasonable and should be consistent with the expected 
improvements in P-T generation methods that have been incorporated into 
the 1995 edition of Appendix G to the Code. The staff therefore 
concludes that the CE NSSS methodology for generating P-T limits is 
equivalent to the current methodology in the 1995 edition of Appendix G 
to the Code, and is acceptable for P-T limit applications.'' The staff 
has extended this conclusion to the Section XI, Appendix G methodology 
of Code Editions through the 2004 Edition.
    The staff has advised licensees to specify whether membrane stress 
intensity factors due to pressure loading, KIM, are 
determined by obtaining a closed-form solution (per the American 
Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code, Section XI, Appendix G) or 
determined by applying finite element modeling methods (per CE NPSD-
683-A, Revision 6). Stress intensity values, KIM, for St. 
Lucie, Units 1 and 2 are calculated using the CE NSSS finite element 
modeling methods.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    FPL is implementing the methodology documented in Topical Report CE 
NPSD-683-A to calculate the RCS pressure-temperature curves and LTOP 
limits for St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2. This methodology 
uses an FEM calculation that, although similar to the ASME Section XI 
requirements, is slightly less conservative. Section IV.A.2 of Appendix 
G to 10 CFR Part 50 states, ``The pressure-temperature limits 
identified as `ASME Appendix G limits' in Table 3 require that the 
limits must be at least as conservative as limits obtained by following 
the methods of analysis and the margins of safety of Appendix G of 
Section XI of the ASME Code.'' Therefore, the use of the methodology 
documented in topical report CE NPSD-683-A requires an exemption from 
10 CFR part 50, Appendix G, Section IV.A.2, in order to implement that 
methodology with a license granted under 10 CFR part 50.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff has completed its environmental assessment of the 
proposed exemption and has concluded

[[Page 53498]]

that the proposed exemption from the implementation of the requirements 
of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G, Section IV.A.2 would not significantly 
affect plant safety and would not have a significant adverse affect on 
the probability of occurrence of an accident.
    The proposed action would not result in any increased radiological 
hazards beyond those previously evaluated by the NRC staff in the 
Safety Evaluation Reports, dated November 8 and November 7, 1974, 
related to operation of St. Lucie Plant, Units 1 and 2, respectively. 
No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be 
released offsite. There is no significant increase in the amount of any 
effluent released offsite. There is no significant increase in 
occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no 
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the 
proposed action.
    The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water 
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-
radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge 
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or 
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity or the plant, or to threatened, 
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or 
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality. 
There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There would 
be no noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the region. 
Therefore, no changes or different types of non-radiological 
environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed action. 
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    The NRC has previously determined, as stated above, that 
methodology documented in CE NPSD-683-A provides similar results as 
those produced by the methods in Appendix G of 10 CFR Part 50. 
Although, in practice, the exemption allows the licensee to not meet 
the requirements of Appendix G, the differences between the two 
methodologies are small and the health and safety of the public remain 
adequately protected.
    The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in 
the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee 
approving the exemption to the regulation, if granted.

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 exemption request would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. If the proposed action were denied, the licensee 
would have to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix 
G, Section IV.A.2. This would cause unnecessary burden on the licensee, 
without a significant benefit in environmental impacts. The 
environmental impacts of the proposed exemption and the ``no action'' 
alternative are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those considered in the Final Environmental Statement related to the 
St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, dated June 1973; the Final 
Environmental Statement related to the operation of St. Lucie Nuclear 
Plant, Unit 2 (NUREG-0842), dated April 1982; and, the plant-specific 
Supplement 11 to NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement 
for License Renewal of Nuclear Power Plants,'' (GEIS). Supplement 11 of 
the GEIS, issued on May 16, 2003, addresses the renewal of operating 
licenses DPR-67 and NPF-16 for St. Lucie Plant, Units 1 and 2, for an 
additional 20 years of operation.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on August 17, 2011, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Florida State official, Mr. William A. 
Passetti of the Bureau of Radiation Control, regarding the 
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no 
comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment, 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.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letters dated March 3, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML110660300), and April 28, 2011 (ADAMS Accession No. ML11119A136). 
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 
O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC are 
accessible electronically through ADAMS in the NRC Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to 
ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-
397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 18th day of August 2011.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Tracy J. Orf,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2011-21901 Filed 8-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P