[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 122 (Monday, June 25, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33716-33717]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15815]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-387 and 50-388]


PPL Susquehanna, LLC; Susquehanna Steam Electric Station 
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of amendments to Facility Operating License (FOL) Nos. NPF-14, 
and NPF-22, issued to PPL Susquehanna, LLC (the licensee), for 
operation of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES), Units 1 and 
2, located in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed license amendment would revise the FOLs and Technical 
Specifications (TS) of SSES, Units 1 and 2, to allow the licensee to 
increase the licensed core power level from 3441 MWt to 3489 MWt, which 
represents a 1.4 percent increase in the allowable thermal power. SSES 
Unit 1 was granted conditional authorization for power production by 
its FOL issued on July 17, 1982. Full power operation of Unit 1 at 
3,293 MWt core power was authorized by Amendment No. 5 to the FOL, 
issued on November 12, 1982. Amendment No. 143 to the FOL, issued on 
March 22, 1995, authorized a power uprate for Unit 1 to 3,441 MWt. SSES 
Unit 2 was granted conditional authorization for power production by 
its FOL issued on March 23, 1984. Full power operation of Unit 2 at 
3,293 MWt core power was authorized by Amendment No. 1 to the FOL, 
issued on June 27, 1984. Amendment No. 103 to the FOL, issued on April 
11, 1994, authorized a power uprate for Unit 2 to 3,441 MWt.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application for license amendment dated October 30, 2000, as 
supplemented by letters dated February 5, May 22, and May 31, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would allow an increase in power generation at 
SSES, Units 1 and 2, to provide additional electrical power for 
distribution to the grid. Power uprate has been widely recognized by 
the industry as a safe and cost-effective method to increase generating 
capacity.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The environmental impact associated with operation of SSES, Units 1 
and 2, has been previously evaluated by the U.S. Atomic Energy 
Commission in the ``Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation 
of Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2,'' dated June 
1981. In this evaluation, the staff considered the potential doses due 
to postulated accidents for the site, at the site boundary, and to the 
population within 50 miles of the site. With regard to consequences of 
postulated accidents, the licensee has reevaluated the current design 
basis accidents (DBAs) in its application for license amendments and 
determined that accident source terms are based on core power levels 
that bound the proposed core power level of 3489 MWt. Therefore, the 
current analyses bound the potential doses due to DBAs based on the 
proposed 1.4 percent increased core power level. No increase in the 
probability of these accidents is expected to occur.
    With regard to normal releases, the licensee has calculated the 
potential impact on the radiological effluents from the proposed 1.4 
percent increase in power level. The licensee concluded that the 
offsite doses from normal effluent releases remain significantly below 
the bounding limits of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 
CFR), Part 50, Appendix I. Normal annual average gaseous releases 
remain limited to a small fraction of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table 
2 limits. The licensee evaluated the effects of power uprate on the 
radiation sources within the plant and the radiation levels during 
normal operating conditions. Post-operation radiation levels are 
expected to increase slightly due to the power uprate; but are expected 
to have no significant effect on the plant. Occupational doses for 
normal operations will be maintained within acceptable limits by the 
site ALARA (as-low-as-reasonably-acheivable) program. Solid and liquid 
waste production may increase slightly as a result of the proposed 1.4 
percent uprate; however, waste processing systems are expected to 
operate within their design requirements.
    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that the proposed action will not increase the probability or 
consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant 
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, 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

[[Page 33717]]

sites. With regard to thermal discharges to the Susquehanna River, the 
staff has previously evaluated temperature effects during normal 
operations at full power and determined the temperature impact on the 
river to be insignificant. The licensee indicated that an increase in 
the cooling tower air flow rate will compensate for the slight increase 
in condenser outlet circulating water temperature, such that no 
perceptible change in the temperature of the cooling tower basin 
blowdown to the Susquehanna River is expected. Therefore, the 
temperature effects on the river will be insignificant. Existing 
administrative controls ensure the conduct of adequate monitoring such 
that appropriate actions can be taken to preclude exceeding the limits 
imposed by the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit. 
No additional requirements or other changes are required as a result of 
the power uprate. No other non-radiological impacts are associated with 
the proposed action.
    Based upon the above, the NRC concludes that the proposed action 
does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other 
environmental impact. Therefore, 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 
SSES, Units 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on June 19, 2001, the staff 
consulted with the Pennsylvania State official, Mr. Michael Murphy of 
the Pennsylvania 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 October 30, 2000, as supplemented by letters 
dated February 5, May 22, and May 31, 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#3b4b5f497b554958155c544d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5e2e3a2c1e302c3d70393128">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of June 2001.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Richard P. Correia,
Acting Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate I, Division of Licensing 
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 01-15815 Filed 6-22-01; 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>