Florida Power Corporation; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: November 4, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 213)]
[Notices]
[Page 59752-59753]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr04no97-98]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-302]
Florida Power Corporation; Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is
considering issuance of an exemption from certain requirements of its
regulations to Florida Power Corporation (the licensee), holder of
Facility Operating License No. DPR-72 for operation of the Crystal
River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant (CR3) located in Citrus County,
Florida.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated September 5, 1997, for exemption from certain
requirements of Appendix R, ``Fire Protection Program for Nuclear Power
Facilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979,'' to Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations part 50 (10 CFR part 50), Section III,
Paragraph O, ``Oil Collection System for Reactor Coolant Pump.''
Specifically, the licensee requests an exemption from the Appendix R,
Section III.O technical requirements for an oil collection system
capable of collecting all potential leakage for the CR3 Reactor Coolant
(RCP) Motor Remote Oil Addition Lines (ROALs).
The Need for the Proposed
10 CFR part 50, Appendix A, ``General Design Criteria for Nuclear
Power Plants,'' Criterion 3 ``Fire Protection,'' specifies that
``Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be
designed and located to minimize, consistent with other safety
requirements, the probability and effect of fires and explosions.'' 10
CFR part 50, Appendix R, sets forth the fire protection features
required to satisfy the General Design Criterion 3 of the Commission's
regulations. Pursuant to 10 CFR part 50, Appendix R, Section III,
Paragraph O, ``Oil Collection System for Reactor Coolant Pump,'' the
RCP shall be equipped with an oil collection system which ``* * * shall
be capable of collecting lube oil from all potential pressurized and
unpressurized leakage sites in the reactor coolant pump lube oil
systems.''
In 1985, CR3 added ROALs to the original RCP oil fill lines in
order to eliminate the need to shutdown the reactor, and to reduce
personnel radiation and heat stress exposure during periodic RCP oil
additions. At that time, the licensee did not consider the ROALs as a
part of the RCP lube oil systems and as a result, did not provide a
lube oil collection system to collect potential leakages. As part of
its current Appendix R design review project, the licensee has now
determined the ROALs to be a part of the RCP lube oil systems,
therefore, requiring a lube oil collection system.
The licensee states that because the ROALs are of a rugged leak
tight design and used only periodically in accordance with controlled
plant procedures, the ROALs do not impact post fire safe shutdown
capability. As a result, the licensee believes that a lube oil
collection system for the ROALs is
[[Page 59753]]
not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. Exemption
from Appendix R, Paragraph O, requirements is needed for the licensee
to have ROALs without a lube oil collection system for collecting oil
from potential leak sites.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
With regard to environmental impact, the Commission has evaluated
the proposed action as described below.
The proposed action will not result in an increase in the
probability or consequences of accidents or result in a change in
occupational or offsite dose. Therefore, there are no radiological
impacts associated with the proposed action.
The proposed action will not result in a change in nonradiological
plant effluents and will have no other nonradiological environmental
impact.
Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no
environmental impacts associated with this action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application would result
in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental
impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action did not involve the use of any resources not previously
considered in the Final Environmental Statements related to operation
of CR3, dated May 1973.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on October 29, 1997 the staff
consulted with the Florida State Official, Mr. Bill Passetti of the
Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no
comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental
impact statement for the proposed exemption. Based upon the foregoing
environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human
environment.
For further details with respect to this action, see the request
for exemption dated September 5, 1997, which is available for public
inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, 2120 L Street,
NW., Washington, DC and at the local public document room located at
Coastal Region Library, 8619 W. Crystal Street, Crystal River, Florida.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 29th day of October 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Leonard A. Wiens,
Acting Director, Project Directorate II-3, Division of Reactor
Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 97-29141 Filed 11-3-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif)