[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 18, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 49176-49178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-23906]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Docket Nos. 50-250 AND 50-251]
Florida Power and Light Company, Turkey Point Unit 3 and Unit 4;
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is
considering issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos.
DPR-31 and DPR-41, issued to Florida Power and Light Company (the
licensee or FPL), for operation of Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 (TP),
respectively, located in Dade County, Florida.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would allow the licensee to increase allowed
core power level from 2200 Megawatts thermal (MWt) to 2300 MWt which is
approximately a 4.5 percent increase in rated core power.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application for amendment dated December 18, 1995, as supplemented on
May 3, June 11, July 1, July 3, and August 22, 1996.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to allow the licensee to increase the
electrical output of each Turkey Point unit by approximately 30 MWe and
thus provide additional electrical power to the grid which serves
commercial and domestic areas on the Florida Power and Light grid. The
thermal power uprate will result in direct displacement of higher cost
fossil fuel generation with lower cost nuclear fuel generation.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed action
and concludes that no significant change in the environmental impact
can be expected for the proposed increase in power. The proposed core
uprate is projected to increase the heat rejected to the environment by
approximately 4.4 percent over the present power level but is
insignificant when compared to the heat load from all four units and
the incident solar radiation heat gain to the canal. The thermal
loading on the canal from the units is approximately 14 x 10 \9\
British thermal units per hour (Btu/hr) and the heat duty increase
associated with the uprate will be approximately .44 x 10 \9\ Btu/hr.
This is expected to increase the temperature between inlet and outlet
by a maximum of 0.7 deg.F over
[[Page 49177]]
existing plant operation. The impact on intake temperatures is
estimated to be about 0.2 deg.F. There are no discharges to Biscayne
Bay or Card Sound from the plant site since the units obtain their
cooling water from and discharge to a closed cooling canal system.
Therefore, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permit does not place any operating limits on either flow or
temperature. Technical Specification (TS) 3.7.4 limits intake
temperature to 100 deg.F and this limit will continue to be in effect
following the uprate. No changes to any federal, state, or local
permits were required for the thermal uprate. Turkey Point has no
specifically prescribed protective actions associated with endangered
wildlife. FPL does have a monitoring permit to tag and count American
crocodiles that is issued by both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
and the State of Florida.
The licensee concluded that the uprate will have no adverse impacts
on the environment nor result in exceeding NPDES permit limits. There
will be no significant increase in non-radiological impacts over those
evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) and evaluations
associated with the amendments to recapture the construction period in
the license term (CP/OL recapture amendments) dated April 7, 1994. The
staff considers that continued compliance with applicable Federal,
State, and Local agency requirements relating to environmental
protection will preclude any significant non-radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed uprate.
The licensee evaluated the offsite radiation exposure to the
maximally exposed individual member of the general public for the
proposed uprate. Section V.D. of the FES projected doses and
anticipated annual release of radioactive materials released to the
environment from routine operations of the two reactors. Table III-2 of
the FES estimated a total annual release of radioactive material in
gaseous effluent of 3650 curies/year/unit for noble gases. The latest
actual releases in 1995 were <1 curie/year/unit.="" the="" fes="" estimate="" for="" iodines="" and="" particulates="" was="" 0.8="" curies/year/unit="" and="" the="" 1995="" releases="" were="" 0.1="" curies/year/unit.="" table="" iii-3="" estimated="" the="" annual="" release="" of="" radioactive="" materials="" in="" liquid="" effluents="" to="" be="" 27="" curie/year/unit="" from="" steam="" generator="" blowdown="" and="" 1="" curie/year/unit="" from="" waste="" disposal.="" the="" actual="" 1995="" releases="" were="" 0="" curies/year/unit="" for="" steam="" generator="" blowdown="" and="" 0.1="" curie/year/unit="" for="" the="" waste="" disposal="" system.="" a="" 5="" percent="" increase="" in="" power="" does="" not="" necessarily="" result="" in="" any="" increase="" in="" effluents.="" moreover,="" data="" for="" years="" prior="" to="" 1995="" were="" reviewed="" by="" the="" staff="" and="" found="" to="" be="" well="" within="" the="" fes="" estimates,="" even="" if="" increased="" by="" 5="" percent.="" therefore,="" the="" staff="" concludes="" that="" the="" actual="" releases="" at="" the="" turkey="" point="" units="" will="" still="" remain="" well="" within="" the="" fes="" estimates.="" with="" respect="" to="" onsite="" radiation="" exposure,="" the="" licensee="" stated="" that="" the="" uprate="" is="" not="" expected="" to="" increase="" the="" day-to-day="" radiation="" exposures="" encountered="" by="" plant="" workers="" since="" the="" in-plant="" radiation="" levels="" will="" not="" change="" significantly="" compared="" to="" the="" evaluations="" in="" the="" fes="" and="" the="" evaluations="" associated="" with="" the="" cp/ol="" recapture="" amendments.="" the="" licensee="" has="" developed="" and="" implemented="" programs="" to="" maintain="" doses="" as-low-as-reasonably-achievable="" (alara).="" the="" annual="" average="" dose="" for="" the="" 3-year="" period="" from="" 1993-1995="" was="" 159="" person-rem="" per="" unit="" at="" turkey="" point.="" this="" is="" low="" compared="" to="" similar="" plants="" and="" the="" 1990-1992="" turkey="" point="" average="" of="" 332="" person-rem="" per="" unit.="" considering="" a="" potential="" increase="" of="" 5="" percent,="" onsite="" radiation="" exposure="" would="" still="" be="" low="" compared="" to="" peer="" groups.="" therefore,="" the="" staff="" concludes="" that="" operation="" at="" the="" uprated="" power="" level="" will="" not="" significantly="" impact="" occupation="" exposures.="" regarding="" radioactive="" waste="" production,="" the="" licensee="" stated="" that="" the="" annual="" volume="" of="" solid="" low="" level="" radioactive="" waste="" is="" not="" expected="" to="" increase="" significantly="" and="" the="" current="" disposal="" volume="" is="" well="" below="" the="" median="" value="" for="" similar="" facilities.="" the="" alara="" program="" includes="" maintaining="" the="" waste="" generated="" and="" waste="" released="" as="" low="" as="" reasonable.="" the="" existing="" design="" of="" the="" liquid="" and="" gaseous="" radwaste="" systems="" was="" based="" on="" a="" core="" power="" level="" of="" 2300="" mwt;="" therefore,="" the="" ability="" of="" the="" systems="" to="" provide="" adequate="" processing="" and="" maintain="" the="" radioactive="" releases="" within="" regulatory="" limits="" is="" not="" impacted="" by="" the="" uprate.="" therefore,="" the="" staff="" concludes="" that="" operation="" at="" the="" uprated="" power="" will="" not="" significantly="" affect="" the="" licensee's="" ability="" to="" handle="" radioactive="" waste="" production.="" ts="" 5.6.1="" limits="" the="" storage="" of="" spent="" fuel="" to="" fuel="" assemblies="" with="" a="" maximum="" enrichment="" loading="" of="" 4.5="" percent="" of="" u-235.="" no="" change="" in="" enrichment="" is="" necessary="" for="" the="" uprate="" condition.="" on="" november="" 14,="" 1984,="" the="" staff="" issued="" its="" ``environmental="" assessment="" and="" finding="" of="" no="" significant="" impact,''="" covering="" the="" storage="" of="" fuel="" with="" an="" enrichment="" loading="" of="" 4.5="" percent="" u-235,="" which="" concluded="" that="" the="" proposed="" action="" will="" not="" have="" a="" significant="" effect="" on="" the="" quality="" of="" the="" human="" environment.="" therefore,="" the="" environmental="" impacts="" of="" this="" aspect="" of="" the="" licensee's="" power="" uprate="" proposal="" has="" been="" previously="" evaluated="" and="" found="" acceptable="" by="" the="" commission.="" ts="" 5.6.1.3="" specifies="" the="" requirements="" regarding="" burnup="" of="" spent="" fuel="" for="" fuel="" storage.="" no="" changes="" were="" necessary="" to="" ts="" 5.6.1.3="" to="" support="" the="" power="" uprate="" request.="" the="" proposed="" change="" will="" not="" significantly="" change="" the="" types="" or="" amounts="" or="" any="" radiological="" effluents="" over="" those="" that="" have="" already="" been="" evaluated="" and="" found="" acceptable="" in="" the="" fes="" and="" evaluations="" associated="" with="" the="" cp/ol="" recapture="" amendments,="" and="" there="" is="" no="" significant="" increase="" in="" the="" allowable="" individual="" or="" cumulative="" radiation="" exposure.="" accordingly,="" the="" commission="" concludes="" that="" there="" are="" no="" significant="" radiological="" environmental="" impacts="" associated="" with="" the="" proposed="" action.="" the="" amendment="" does="" not="" significantly="" affect="" nonradiological="" plant="" effluents,="" has="" no="" other="" environmental="" impact,="" and="" continued="" compliance="" with="" applicable="" federal,="" state,="" and="" local="" agency="" requirements="" relating="" to="" environmental="" protection="" will="" preclude="" any="" significant="" non-="" radiological="" environmental="" impacts="" associated="" with="" the="" proposed="" uprate.="" accordingly,="" the="" commission="" concludes="" that="" there="" are="" no="" significant="" nonradiological="" environmental="" impacts="" associated="" with="" the="" proposed="" action.="" alternatives="" to="" the="" proposed="" action="" since="" the="" commission="" has="" concluded="" there="" is="" no="" significant="" environmental="" impact="" associated="" with="" the="" proposed="" action,="" any="" alternatives="" with="" equal="" or="" greater="" environmental="" impact="" need="" not="" be="" evaluated.="" as="" an="" alternative="" to="" the="" proposed="" action,="" the="" nrc="" staff="" considered="" denial="" of="" the="" proposed="" action.="" denial="" of="" the="" application="" would="" result="" in="" no="" change="" in="" current="" environmental="" impacts.="" alternative="" use="" of="" resources="" this="" action="" does="" not="" involve="" the="" use="" of="" any="" resources="" not="" previously="" considered="" in="" the="" final="" environmental="" statement="" dated="" july="" 1972="" for="" turkey="" point="" units="" 3="" and="" 4.="" agencies="" and="" persons="" consulted="" in="" accordance="" with="" its="" stated="" policy,="" on="" september="" 12,="" 1996="" the="" nrc="" staff="" consulted="" with="" the="" florida="" state="" official,="" mr.="" harland="" keaton="" of="" the="" state="" office="" of="" radiation="" control,="" regarding="" the="" environmental="" impact="" of="" the="" proposed="" action.="" the="" state="" official="" had="" no="" comments.="" finding="" of="" no="" significant="" impact="" based="" upon="" the="" environmental="" assessment,="" the="" commission="" concludes="" [[page="" 49178]]="" that="" the="" proposed="" action="" will="" not="" have="" a="" significant="" effect="" on="" the="" quality="" of="" the="" human="" environment.="" accordingly,="" the="" commission="" 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="" letter="" dated="" december="" 18,="" 1995,="" as="" supplemented="" on="" may="" 3,="" june="" 11,="" july="" 1,="" july="" 3,="" and="" august="" 22,="" 1996,="" which="" are="" available="" for="" public="" inspection="" at="" the="" commission's="" public="" document="" room,="" the="" gelman="" building,="" 2120="" l="" street,="" nw.,="" washington,="" dc,="" and="" at="" the="" local="" public="" document="" room="" located="" at="" the="" florida="" international="" university,="" university="" park,="" miami,="" florida="" 33199.="" dated="" at="" rockville,="" maryland,="" this="" 12th="" day="" of="" september="" 1996.="" for="" the="" nuclear="" regulatory="" commission.="" frederick="" j.="" hebdon,="" director,="" project="" directorate="" ii-3,="" division="" of="" reactor="" projects--i/ii,="" office="" of="" nuclear="" reactor="" regulation.="" [fr="" doc.="" 96-23906="" filed="" 9-17-96;="" 8:45="" am]="" billing="" code="" 7590-01-p="">