[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 239 (Tuesday, December 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77919-77920]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-31326]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-400; NRC-2010-0020]


Carolina Power & Light Company Shearon Harris Nuclear Power 
Plant, Unit 1; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant 
Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an exemption, pursuant to title 10 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) section 73.5, ``Specific exemptions,'' 
from the implementation date for certain requirements of 10 CFR part 
73, ``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Renewed 
Facility Operating License No. NPF-63, issued to Carolina Power & Light 
Company (the licensee), now doing business as Progress Energy 
Carolinas, Inc., for operation of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power 
Plant (HNP), Unit 1, located in New Hill, North Carolina. In accordance 
with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC staff prepared an environmental assessment 
documenting its finding. The NRC staff concluded that the proposed 
actions will have no significant environmental impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the licensee from the required 
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for one specific requirement of 
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, HNP, Unit 1 would be granted a second 
exemption, further extending the date for compliance with one remaining 
item of the requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.55, from December 15, 
2010, (the date specified in a prior exemption granted by NRC on 
February 24, 2010), until November 30, 2011. The proposed action, an 
extension of the schedule for completion of certain actions required by 
the revised 10 CFR part 73, does not result in any additional physical 
changes to the reactor, fuel, plant structures, support structures, 
water, or land at the HNP, Unit 1 site.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated September 20, 2010.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed exemption is needed to provide the licensee with 
additional time, beyond the date granted by the NRC letter dated 
February 24, 2010, to implement one remaining item of the three 
requirements in the previous exemption that involves important physical 
modifications to the HNP, Unit 1 security system. There are several 
issues which have delayed the work to this point, and/or impacted the 
projected schedule, such as the existence of safety-related conduit and 
dedicated safe shut down (SSD) equipment of HNP, Unit 1 within the room 
in which some important security modifications are planned. A direct 
outside access route to the physical construction area has not been 
available due to design basis tornado and missile considerations for 
the safety related conduits and SSD equipment. These issues were 
revealed as the design evolved from the conceptual state to a detailed 
design state. Presently, the licensee is pursuing a design solution 
that will allow both temporary and ultimately permanent direct outside 
access to the area. Additional time, beyond that previously approved, 
is needed due the extensive redesign and review effort that was 
unforeseen at the conceptual design stage.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC staff has completed its environmental assessment of the 
proposed exemption. The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed 
action to further extend the implementation deadline for one item would 
not significantly affect plant safety and would not have a significant 
adverse effect on the probability of an accident occurring.
    The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological 
hazard beyond those hazards previously analyzed in the environmental 
assessment and final finding of no significant impact made by the 
Commission in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73 as discussed 
in a Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). There 
will be no change to radioactive effluents that affect radiation 
exposures to plant workers and members of the public. Therefore, no 
changes or different types of radiological impacts are expected as a 
result of the proposed exemption.
    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 of 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 impact to socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no changes to 
or different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are 
expected as a result of the proposed exemption.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With its request to extend the implementation deadline, the 
licensee currently maintains a security system acceptable to the NRC 
and that will continue to provide acceptable physical protection of 
HNP, Unit 1 in lieu of the new requirements in 10 CFR part 73. 
Therefore, the extension of the implementation date for one element of 
the new requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to November 30, 2011, would not 
have any significant environmental impacts.
    The NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption 
that will

[[Page 77920]]

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 actions, the NRC 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 was denied, the licensee 
would have to comply with the existing implementation deadline of 
December 15, 2010, for one remaining item of the three requirements, as 
granted on February 24, 2010. 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 for HNP, Unit 1, 
NUREG-0972, dated October 31, 1983, as supplemented through the 
``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear 
Plants: Regarding Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1--Final 
Report (NUREG-1437, Supplement 33).''

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on December 2, 2010, the NRC 
staff consulted with the North Carolina State official, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#b3dfd6d69dd0dccbf3ddd0d7d6ddc19dd4dcc5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e68a8383c885899ea6888582838894c8818990">[email protected]</span></a> of the North Carolina Department of Environment and 
Natural Resources, 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 letter dated September 20, 2010. Portions of the September 
20, 2010, submittal contain security-related information and, 
accordingly, a redacted version of this letter is available for public 
review in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS), Accession No. ML102650191. This document 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 O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike 
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available records 
will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic 
Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site: 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 <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#017165732f7364726e74736264416f73622f666e77"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="cdbda9bfe3bfa8bea2b8bfaea88da3bfaee3aaa2bb">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of December, 2010.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Farideh E. Saba,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-31326 Filed 12-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>