[Federal Register: July 16, 2003 (Volume 68, Number 136)]
[Notices]
[Page 42136-42137]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16jy03-125]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-413 and 50-414]
Duke Energy Corporation, North Carolina Electric Membership
Corporation, Saluda River Electric Cooperative, Inc., Catawba Nuclear
Station, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of exemptions from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR) part 50, section 50.44, section 50.46, and Appendix K, for
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-35 and NPF-52, issued to Duke Power
Company, et al, (the licensee), for operation of the Catawba Nuclear
Station (CNS), Units 1 and 2, located in York County, South Carolina.
Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the Catawba Nuclear Station, Units
1 and 2, from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.44, 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR
part 50, Appendix K, to allow the use of eight Lead Test Assemblies
(LTAs) fabricated with a cladding material that contains a nominally
lower tin content than previously approved cladding materials.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated December 3, 2002, as supplemented by letter dated
April 8, 2003.
The Need for the Proposed Action
As the nuclear industry pursues longer operating cycles with
increased fuel discharge burnups and more aggressive fuel management,
the corrosion performance specifications for the nuclear fuel cladding
become more demanding. Industry data indicates that corrosion
resistance improves for cladding with a lower tin content. The optimum
tin level provides a reduced corrosion rate while maintaining the
benefits of mechanical strengthening and resistance to accelerated
corrosion from abnormal chemistry conditions. In addition, fuel rod
internal pressures (resulting from the increased fuel duty, use of
integral fuel burnable absorbers and corrosion/temperature feedback
effects) have become more limiting with respect to fuel rod design
criteria. By reducing the associated corrosion buildup, and thus,
minimizing temperature feedback effects, additional
[[Page 42137]]
margin to fuel rod internal pressure design criteria is obtained.
As part of a program to address these issues, the Westinghouse
Electric Company has developed an LTA program in cooperation with the
licensee that includes a ZIRLO fuel cladding with a tin content lower
than the currently licensed range for ZIRLO. The NRC's regulations in
10 CFR 50.44, 10 CFR 50.46 and in 10 CFR part 50, Appendix K, make no
provision for use of fuel rods clad in a material other than Zircalloy
or ZIRLO. The licensee has requested the use of an LTA with a tin
composition that is less than that specified in the licensing basis for
ZIRLO, as defined in Westinghouse design specifications. Therefore, use
of the LTA calls for exemptions from 10 CFR 50.44, 10 CFR 50.46 and 10
CFR part 50, Appendix K. As part of this program, the licensee's
current plans are to include eight LTAs in the Catawba Nuclear Station,
Unit 1, Cycle 15, core in non-limiting core locations during the
refueling outage currently scheduled to begin in the Fall of 2003. The
licensee has requested the exemption for both Catawba units, and the
staff finds the exemption request for a total of up to eight LTAs to be
applicable to either of the Catawba units.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC staff has completed its environmental evaluation of the
proposed action and concludes that the proposed exemptions would not
increase the probability or consequences of accidents previously
analyzed and would not affect facility radiation levels or facility
radiological effluents.
The proposed action will not significantly 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 nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect
nonradiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact.
Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Impacts of the 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
The action does not involve the use of any different resource than
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Impact Statement
for the CNS, Units 1 and 2, NUREG-0921--``Final Environmental Impact
Statement Related to the Operation of Catawba Nuclear Station; Units 1
and 2'', U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, dated January 1983.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On July 9, 2003, the staff consulted with the South Carolina State
official, Mr. Henry Porter, of the Department of Health and
Environmental Control, 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 3, 2002, as supplemented by letter
dated April 8, 2003. Documents 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 O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (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 by
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this tenth day of July, 2003.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Leonard N. Olshan,
Acting Chief, Section I, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing
Project Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 03-17958 Filed 7-15-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P