[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33583-33584]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15707]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-354]


PSEG Nuclear Limited Liability Company; Hope Creek Generating 
Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License (FOL) No. NPF-
57, issued to PSEG Nuclear LLC, (the licensee), for operation of the 
Hope Creek Generating Station (HCGS) located in Lower Alloways Creek 
Township, Salem County, New Jersey.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed

    The proposed license amendment would revise the FOL and Technical 
Specifications (TSs) for the HCGS, to allow the licensee to increase 
the licensed core power level from 3,293 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 
3,339 MWt, which represents a 1.4-percent increase in the allowable 
thermal power. The NRC authorized HCGS for full power production at 
3,293 MWt with issuance of the FOL on July 25, 1986. In addition to the 
power uprate, the proposed license amendment would allow the licensee 
to make editorial changes to the TS Bases and Index sections.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for license amendment dated December 1, 2000, as 
supplemented by letters dated February 12, May 7, and May 14, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would allow an increase in power generation at 
HCGS to provide additional electrical power for distribution to the 
grid. In certain circumstances, power uprate has been recognized as a 
safe and cost-effective method to increase generating capacity. The 
proposed action would also allow editorial changes to the TS Bases and 
Index sections to provide corrections to references and typographical 
errors.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that implementation of the proposed amendment would not have 
a significant impact on the environment.
    With regard to potential radiological impacts, the licensee has 
evaluated the proposed 1.4-percent power uprate with respect to its 
effect on the consequences of postulated design-basis accidents and on 
normal releases of liquid and gaseous effluents. For postulated design-
basis accidents, the effects of the proposed power uprate are bounded 
by current licensing basis dose analyses. No increase in the 
probability of these accidents is expected to occur. For liquid and 
gaseous effluents, the offsite doses resulting from normal releases are 
not impacted by the proposed power uprate because the uprated power is 
less than the core power level that was used for the source term 
development in the existing analyses. The release volumes from the 
liquid and solid waste processing systems are not expected to change as 
a result of the proposed power level change. The proposed editorial 
changes to the TSs are administrative in nature and would have no 
radiological impact. The proposed action will not significantly 
increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are 
being made in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, 
and there is no significant increase in occupational or public 
radiation exposure. Based on the

[[Page 33584]]

above, the staff concludes that there are no significant radiological 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not involve any historic sites. With regard to other non-
radiological impacts, the licensee performed an environmental 
evaluation, as documented in the submittal dated May 14, 2001, that 
considered thermal effects, consumptive uses, and particulate 
emissions. This evaluation was performed assuming a 1.5-percent uprated 
power value, thus bounding the proposed 1.4-percent power uprate. The 
evaluation was performed as required by the Environmental Protection 
Plan (EPP) for HCGS (Appendix B to FOL No. NPF-57). The EPP states that 
``[e]nvironmental concerns identified in the FES-OL [Final 
Environmental Statement--Operating Licensing Stage (NUREG-1074, dated 
December 1984)] which relate to water quality matters are regulated by 
way of the licensee's NPDES [New Jersey Pollution Discharge Elimination 
System] permit.'' The NJDES permit imposes limits on plant effluents 
that are discharged to the Delaware River estuary. The licensee's 
environmental evaluation concluded that there are no significant non-
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed power 
uprate and that the current NJDES permit limits would not require any 
changes. The proposed editorial changes to the TSs are administrative 
in nature and would have no non-radiological impact. Based on the 
above, the staff concludes that there are no significant non-
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

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 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 does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the 
HCGS.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 7, 2001, the staff 
consulted with the New Jersey State official, Mr. Dennis Zannoni, of 
the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 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 December 1, 2000, as supplemented by letter 
dated February 12, May 7, and May 14, 2001. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at 
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically 
from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management Systems (ADAMS) 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC web site, 
http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. If you do not have access to 
ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-
800-397-4209, 301-415-4737 or by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a1d1c5d3e1cfd3c28fc6ced7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a6d6c2d4e6c8d4c588c1c9d0">[email protected]</span></a>. 

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of June 2001.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard B. Ennis,
Project Manager, Section 2, Project Directorate I, Division of 
Licensing Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 01-15707 Filed 6-21-01; 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>