81_FR_26924 81 FR 26838 - STP Nuclear Operating Company, South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2

81 FR 26838 - STP Nuclear Operating Company, South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 86 (May 4, 2016)

Page Range26838-26843
FR Document2016-10429

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing for public comment a draft environmental assessment (EA) prepared under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and NRC regulations. This EA summarizes the results of the NRC staff's environmental review, which evaluates the potential environmental impacts of issuing license amendments and granting regulatory exemptions in response to a request from STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC, the licensee) for Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80, for South Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2, respectively. The license amendments and regulatory exemptions would allow STPNOC to make changes to the STP licensing basis to incorporate the use of both a deterministic and a risk-informed approach to address safety issues discussed in Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191 and to close Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02.

Federal Register, Volume 81 Issue 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2016)
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 86 (Wednesday, May 4, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26838-26843]
From the Federal Register Online  [www.thefederalregister.org]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10429]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499; NRC-2016-0092]


STP Nuclear Operating Company, South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Draft environmental assessment and finding of no significant 
impact; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing for 
public comment a draft environmental assessment (EA) prepared under the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and NRC regulations. 
This EA summarizes the results of the NRC staff's environmental review, 
which evaluates the potential environmental impacts of issuing license 
amendments and granting regulatory exemptions in response to a request 
from STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC, the licensee) for Facility 
Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80, for South Texas Project 
(STP), Units 1 and 2, respectively. The license amendments and 
regulatory exemptions would allow STPNOC to make changes to the STP 
licensing basis to incorporate the use of both a deterministic and a 
risk-informed approach to address safety issues discussed in Generic 
Safety Issue (GSI)-191 and to close Generic Letter (GL) 2004-02.

DATES: Submit comments by June 20, 2016. Comments received after this 
date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission 
is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this 
date.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by any of the following methods 
(unless this document describes a different method for submitting 
comments on a specific subject):
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0092. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact 
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of 
this document.
     Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, Office of Administration, 
Mail Stop: OWFN-12-H08, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, 
DC 20555-0001.
    For additional direction on obtaining information and submitting 
comments, see ``Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments'' in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Regner, Office of Nuclear Reactor 
Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555-
0001; telephone: 301-415-1906, email: Lisa.Regner@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Obtaining Information and Submitting Comments

A. Obtaining Information

    Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2016-0092 when contacting the NRC 
about the availability of information for this action. You may obtain 
publicly-available information related to this action by any of the 
following methods:
     Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2016-0092.
     NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the 
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and 
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, 
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. For 
the convenience of the reader, instructions about obtaining materials 
referenced in this document are provided in a table in the section of 
this notice entitled, Availability of Documents.
     NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public 
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555 
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

B. Submitting Comments

    Please include Docket ID NRC-2016-0092 in your comment submission.
    The NRC cautions you not to include identifying or contact 
information that you do not want to be publicly disclosed in your 
comment submission. The NRC posts all comment submissions at http://www.regulations.gov as well as entering the comment submissions into 
ADAMS. The NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to remove 
identifying or contact information.
    If you are requesting or aggregating comments from other persons 
for submission to the NRC, then you should inform those persons not to 
include identifying or contact information that they do not want to be 
publicly disclosed in their comment submission. Your request should 
state that the NRC does not routinely edit comment submissions to 
remove such information before making the comment submissions available 
to the public or entering the comment submissions into ADAMS.

II. Introduction and Background

    The NRC is considering a request to amend Facility Operating 
Licenses NPF-76 and NPF-80, issued to STPNOC for operation of STP, 
Units 1 and 2, located in Matagorda County, Texas, and to grant certain 
regulatory exemptions for STP, Units 1 and 2, in accordance with 
section 50.90, ``Application for amendment of license, construction 
permit, or early site permit'' and section 50.12, ``Specific 
exemptions,'' of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), 
respectively. The license amendments and regulatory exemptions would 
allow STPNOC to resolve concerns associated with GSI-191, ``Assessment 
of Debris Accumulation on PWR [Pressurized-Water Reactor] Sump 
Performance,'' and the associated GL 2004-02, ``Potential Impact of 
Debris Blockage on Emergency Recirculation during Design Basis 
Accidents at Pressurized-Water

[[Page 26839]]

Reactors,'' issued on September 13, 2004.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, ``Criteria for and identification of 
licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,'' 
the NRC has prepared a draft EA summarizing the findings of its 
environmental NEPA review of this proposed action. The NRC concluded 
that the proposed action will have no significant environmental impact.

Background

    The NRC established a general safety issue (GSI-191) to determine 
whether the transport and accumulation of debris from a loss-of-coolant 
accident in the PWR containment structure would impede the operation of 
the emergency core cooling system or containment spray system. A loss-
of-coolant accident within the containment structure is assumed to be 
caused by a break in the primary coolant loop piping. Water discharged 
from the pipe break would collect on the containment structure floor 
and within the containment emergency sump. During this type of 
accident, the emergency core cooling systems and containment spray 
systems would initially draw cooling water from the refueling water 
storage tank. However, realigning the emergency core cooling system 
pumps to the containment structure emergency sump would provide long-
term cooling of the reactor core. Therefore, successful long-term 
cooling depends on the ability of the containment structure emergency 
sump to provide adequate flow to the residual heat removal 
recirculation pumps for extended periods of time.
    One of the concerns addressed by the implementation of GSI-191 is 
that debris, such as insulation installed on piping and components, 
within the containment structure could be dislodged by a jet of water 
and steam from a loss-of-coolant accident. Water, along with debris, 
would accumulate at the bottom of the containment structure and would 
flow towards the emergency sump pumps. Insulation and other fibrous 
material could block the emergency sump screens and suction strainers, 
which in turn could prevent the ability of the containment emergency 
sump to provide adequate flow to the residual heat removal 
recirculation pumps (for more information, see NUREG-0897, 
``Containment Emergency Sump Performance,'' Revision 1.
    The NRC issued GL 2004-02 to address this safety concern by 
requiring licensees of PWRs to: (1) Increase the size of their 
containment sump strainers, (2) replace fibrous insulation inside 
containment, and (3) implement other compensatory measures in order to 
significantly reduce the risk of emergency sump strainer clogging.
    Subsequent to the issuance of GL 2004-02, the NRC staff identified 
another related concern with the potential for debris to bypass the 
sump strainers (even the new strainers) and enter the reactor core. 
This safety issue could result in the build-up of material on fuel 
assemblies, inhibit heat transfer, and prevent adequate cooling of the 
reactor core. Since 2004, the NRC and industry have conducted tests to 
gain more information on this concern. In 2012, the NRC staff developed 
three options for resolution of all of its debris concerns, which are 
discussed in SECY-12-0093, ``Closure Options for Generic Safety Issue 
191, Assessment of Debris Accumulation on Pressurized-Water Reactor 
Sump Performance,'' dated July 9, 2012.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ On December 14, 2012, the Commission approved all three 
options for closure of this safety issue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The three options for demonstrating compliance with 10 CFR 50.46, 
``Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light-
water nuclear power reactors,'' are summarized as follows.
    1. Option 1 allows the use of approved models and test methods.
    2. Option 2 allows the industry to implement additional mitigating 
measures until resolution is completed and take additional time to 
resolve issues through further industry testing or use of a risk-
informed approach. Use of this option has two alternative methods.
     Option 2A: Industry can perform more testing and analysis 
and submit a topical report for NRC review and approval.
     Option 2B: Industry can develop a risk-informed approach 
to quantify the risk associated with this generic issue and submit a 
license amendment request for NRC review and approval.
    3. Option 3 allows industry to separate the regulatory treatment of 
the sump strainer and in-vessel effects. The emergency core cooling 
system strainers will be evaluated using currently approved models, 
while in-vessel effects will be addressed using a risk-informed 
approach.
    STPNOC proposes to use Option 2B to demonstrate compliance with 10 
CFR 50.46 through both plant-specific testing and a risk-informed 
approach (described in more detail in the following paragraphs). Since 
the use of a risk-informed approach is not recognized in the 
regulations, STPNOC requested an exemption to 10 CFR 50.46(a)(1) for 
certain conditions associated with the treatment of debris. 
Additionally, STPNOC requested exemptions to appendix A to 10 CFR part 
50, General Design Criteria (GDC) 35, ``Emergency Core Cooling,'' GDC 
38, ``Containment Heat Removal,'' and GDC 41, ``Containment Atmosphere 
Cleanup,'' to allow its use of a risk-informed approach for certain 
conditions in the containment debris analysis. If approved, the 
proposed action would not result in modifications within the 
containment structure or changes to the emergency core cooling system.

III. Draft Environmental Assessment

Description of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is to issue certain license amendments and to 
grant certain regulatory exemptions requested by STPNOC. The license 
amendments and regulatory exemptions would allow STPNOC to make changes 
to the STP licensing basis to incorporate the use of both a 
deterministic and a risk-informed approach to address safety issues 
discussed in GSI-191 and close GL 2004-02. If approved, no physical 
modifications to the nuclear plant or changes to reactor operations 
involving the emergency core cooling system would be required. The 
proposed action is in response to the licensee's application dated June 
19, 2013, and supplemented by letters dated October 3, October 31, 
November 13, November 21, and December 23, 2013 (two letters); January 
9, February 13, February 27, March 17, March 18, May 15 (two letters), 
May 22, June 25, and July 15, 2014; and March 10, March 25, and August 
20, 2015.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    As the holder of Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80, 
STPNOC is expected to address the safety issues discussed in GSI-191 
and to close GL 2004-02 with respect to STP, Units 1 and 2. Consistent 
with SECY-12-0093, STPNOC chose an approach which requires, in part, 
that STPNOC request that the NRC amend the operating licenses and grant 
certain regulatory exemptions for each unit.

Plant Site and Environs

    The STP is located on approximately 12,220 acres (4,945 hectares) 
in rural and sparsely populated Matagorda County, Texas, approximately 
70 miles (mi) [110 kilometers (km)] south-southwest of Houston. Nearby 
communities include Matagorda, approximately 8 mi (13 km) south of the 
site; the City of Palacios, 11 mi (18 km)

[[Page 26840]]

west of the site; and Bay City, 13 mi (21 km) north of the site.
    The STP power plant consists of two four-loop Westinghouse PWR 
units. The reactor core of each unit heats water, which is pumped to 
four steam generators, where the heated water is converted to steam. 
The steam is then used to turn turbines, which are connected to 
electrical generators that produce electricity. A simplified drawing of 
a PWR can be viewed at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/pwrs.html.
    The reactor, steam generators, and other components are housed in a 
concrete and steel containment structure (building). The containment 
structure is a reinforced concrete cylinder with a concrete slab base 
and hemispherical dome. A welded steel liner is attached to the inside 
face of the concrete shell to ensure a high degree of leak tightness. 
In addition, the 4-foot (1.2-meter)-thick concrete walls of the 
containment structure serve as a radiation shield. Additional 
information on the plant structures and systems, as well as the 
environmental impact statement for license renewal, can be found in 
NUREG-1437, Supplement 48, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for 
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplement 48 Regarding South Texas 
Project, Units 1 and 2.''

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Radiological and non-radiological impacts on the environment that 
may result from issuing the license amendments and granting the 
regulatory exemptions are summarized in the following sections.

Non-Radiological Impacts

    No physical modifications to the nuclear plant or changes to 
reactor operations involving the emergency core cooling system would be 
required if the NRC were to issue the requested license amendments and 
grant the regulatory exemptions. Also, no physical changes would be 
made to other structures or land use within the STP site. Non-
radiological liquid effluents or gaseous emissions would not change and 
therefore environmental conditions at the STP site also would not 
change. In addition, issuing the license amendments and granting the 
regulatory exemptions would not result in changes to the use of 
resources or cause any new environmental impacts.
    Therefore, there would be no non-radiological environmental impacts 
to any resource or any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of 
resources.

Non-Radiological Cumulative Impacts

    Since issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions would not result in environmental effects, there would be no 
cumulative impact.

Radiological Impacts

Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluents and Solid Waste

    The STP uses waste treatment systems to collect, process, recycle, 
and dispose of gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes that contain 
radioactive material in a safe and controlled manner within NRC and 
Environmental Protection Agency radiation safety standards. Issuing the 
license amendments and granting the regulatory exemptions will not 
result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant or reactor 
operations that would affect the types and quantities of radioactive 
material generated during plant operations; therefore, there will be no 
changes to the plant radioactive waste treatment systems. A detailed 
description of the STP radioactive waste handling and disposal 
activities is contained in Chapter 2.1.2 of Supplement 48 to NUREG-
1437.

Radioactive Gaseous Effluents

    The objectives of the STP gaseous waste management system (GWMS) 
are to process and control the release of radioactive gaseous effluents 
into the environment to be within the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1301, 
``Dose limits for individual members of the public,'' and to be 
consistent with the as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA) dose 
objectives set forth in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50. The GWMS is 
designed so that radiation exposure to plant workers is within the dose 
limits in 10 CFR 20.1201, ``Occupational dose limits for adults.''
    Issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions will not result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant 
or reactor operations; therefore, there will be no changes to the GWMS. 
The existing equipment and plant procedures that control radioactive 
releases to the environment will continue to be used to maintain 
radioactive gaseous releases within the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 
and the ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.

Radioactive Liquid Effluents

    The function of the STP liquid waste processing system (LWPS) is to 
collect and process radioactive liquid wastes to reduce radioactivity 
and chemical concentrations to levels acceptable for discharge to the 
environment or to recycle the liquids for use in plant systems. The 
principal objectives of the LWPS are to collect liquid wastes that may 
contain radioactive material and to maintain sufficient processing 
capability so that liquid waste may be discharged to the environment 
below the regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 and consistent with the 
ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50. The waste is 
routed through a monitor that measures the radioactivity and can 
automatically terminate the release in the event radioactivity exceeds 
predetermined levels. The liquid waste is discharged into the main 
cooling reservoir. The entire main cooling reservoir is within the STP 
site boundary and the public is prohibited from access to the area.
    Issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions will not result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant 
or reactor operations; therefore, there will be no changes to the LWPS. 
The existing equipment and plant procedures that control radioactive 
releases to the environment will continue to be used to maintain 
radioactive liquid releases within the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 
and the ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.

Radioactive Solid Wastes

    The function of the STP solid waste processing system (SWPS) is to 
process, package, and store the solid radioactive wastes generated by 
nuclear plant operations until they are shipped off site to a vendor 
for further processing or for permanent disposal at a licensed burial 
facility, or both. The storage areas have restricted access and 
shielding to reduce radiation rates to plant workers. The principal 
objectives of the SWPS are to package and transport the waste in 
compliance with NRC regulations in 10 CFR part 61, ``Licensing 
Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste,'' and 10 CFR part 
71, ``Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material,'' and the 
U.S. Department of Transportation regulations in 49 CFR parts 170 
through 179; and to maintain the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201, 10 CFR 
20.1301, and appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.
    Issuing the license amendments and granting the regulatory 
exemptions will not result in any physical changes to the nuclear plant 
or reactor operations; therefore, the waste can be handled by the SWPS 
without modification. The existing equipment and plant procedures that 
control radioactive solid waste handling will continue to be used to 
maintain exposures within the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201, 10 CFR

[[Page 26841]]

20.1301, and 10 CFR part 50 appendix I.

Occupational Radiation Doses

    The proposed action of issuing the license amendments and granting 
the regulatory exemptions will not result in any physical changes being 
made to the nuclear plant or reactor operations; therefore, there will 
be no change to any in-plant radiation sources. The licensee's 
radiation protection program monitors radiation levels throughout the 
nuclear plant to establish appropriate work controls, training, 
temporary shielding, and protective equipment requirements so that 
worker doses will remain within the dose limits of 10 CFR part 20, 
subpart C, ``Occupational Dose Limits.'' Issuing the license amendments 
and granting the regulatory exemptions will not change radiation levels 
within the nuclear plant and, therefore, will have no increased 
radiological impact to the workers.

Offsite Radiation Dose

    The primary sources of offsite dose to members of the public from 
the STP are radioactive gaseous and liquid effluents. As discussed 
previously, there will be no change to the operation of the STP 
radioactive gaseous and liquid waste management systems or the ability 
to perform their intended functions. Also, there will be no change to 
the STP radiation monitoring system and procedures used to control the 
release of radioactive effluents in accordance with radiation 
protection standards in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR 190, ``Environmental 
Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations,'' and the 
ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part 50.
    Based on the previous statements, the offsite radiation dose to 
members of the public would not change and would continue to be within 
regulatory limits, and, therefore, issuing the license amendments and 
granting the regulatory exemptions will not change offsite dose levels 
and, consequently, the health effects of the proposed action will not 
be significant.

Design-Basis Accidents

    Design-basis accidents at STP, Units 1 and 2, are evaluated by both 
the licensee and the NRC to ensure that the units can withstand the 
spectrum of postulated accidents without undue hazard to the public 
health and safety and the protection of the environment.
    Separate from its environmental review in this EA, the NRC staff is 
evaluating the licensee's technical and safety analyses provided in 
support of the proposed action of issuing the license amendments and 
granting the exemption requests to ensure that, following the proposed 
action, the licensee will continue to meet the NRC regulatory 
requirements for safe operation. The results and conclusion of the NRC 
staff's safety review will be documented in a publicly available safety 
evaluation. If the NRC staff concludes in this safety evaluation that 
taking the proposed action will (1) provide reasonable assurance that 
the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation 
in the proposed manner, (2) provide reasonable assurance that such 
activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's 
regulations, and (3) not be inimical to the common defense and security 
or to the health and safety of the public, then the proposed action 
will also not have a significant environmental impact. The NRC will not 
take the proposed action absent such a safety conclusion.

Radiological Cumulative Impacts

    The radiological dose limits for protection of the public and plant 
workers have been developed by the NRC and the Environmental Protection 
Agency to address the cumulative impact of acute and long-term exposure 
to radiation and radioactive material. These dose limits are codified 
in 10 CFR part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation,'' and 
40 CFR part 190.
    Cumulative radiation doses are required to be within the limits set 
forth in the regulations cited in the previous paragraph. Issuing the 
license amendments and granting the exemptions will not require any 
physical changes to the plant or plant activities, there will not be 
changes to in-plant radiation sources, and offsite radiation dose to 
members of the public will not change. Therefore, the NRC staff 
concludes that there would not be a significant cumulative radiological 
impact from the proposed action.

Radiological Impacts Summary

    Based on these radiological evaluations, the proposed action of 
issuing the license amendments and granting the exemptions would not 
result in any significant radiological impacts. Therefore, if the NRC 
staff concludes in its separate safety evaluation that taking the 
proposed action will (1) provide reasonable assurance that the health 
and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the 
proposed manner, (2) provide reasonable assurance that such activities 
will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and 
(3) not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health 
and safety of the public, then the proposed action will not have a 
significant radiological impact.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
    As discussed earlier, licensees have options in responding to GL 
2004-02 and demonstrating compliance with 10 CFR 50.46 to consider the 
impacts of debris on emergency core cooling system. Consistent with 
these options, as an alternative to the proposed action, the licensee 
could choose to remove and replace insulation within the reactor 
containment building. This would require the physical removal and 
disposal of significant amounts of insulation from a radiation area 
within the reactor containment building and the installation of new 
insulation less likely to impact sump performance.
    Removal of the existing insulation from the containment building 
would generate radiologically contaminated waste. STPNOC estimated that 
4,620 cubic feet of insulation would be removed and stored onsite until 
disposal. The old insulation would require special handling and 
packaging so that it could be safely transported from the STP site. The 
licensee's existing low-level radioactive and hazardous waste handling 
and disposal activities would likely be used to process and store this 
waste material. The old insulation would then be transported to a low-
level radioactive or hazardous waste disposal site. Energy (fuel) would 
be expended to transport the insulation and land would be expended at 
the disposal site.
    The removal of the old insulation and installation of the new 
insulation would expose workers to radiation. In its application, 
STPNOC estimates that this would result in an additional collective 
radiation exposure of 158-176 person-roentgen equivalent man (rem) over 
its baseline collective radiation exposure. The NRC staff reviewed 
NUREG-0713, Volume 34, ``Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial 
Nuclear Power Reactors and Other Facilities 2012: Forty-Fifth Annual 
Report,'' and determined that STPNOC's average baseline collective 
radiation exposure is approximately 90 person-rem. This additional 158-
176 person-rem collective exposure would be shared across the entire 
work force involved with removing and reinstalling insulation.
    In SECY-12-0093, the NRC staff attempted to develop a total 
occupational dose estimate for the work

[[Page 26842]]

involved in insulation removal and replacement associated with GSI-191. 
Due to uncertainties in the scope of work required to remove and 
replace insulation at a specific nuclear plant and other site-specific 
factors such as source term and hazardous materials, the NRC staff was 
unable to estimate the total occupational dose associated with this 
work. However, dose estimates were provided by the Nuclear Energy 
Institute (NEI) in a letter to the NRC dated March 30, 2012, based on 
information collected on occupational radiation exposures that have 
been, or could be, incurred during insulation removal and replacement. 
In the letter, NEI noted similar difficulties to those experienced by 
the NRC staff in estimating the potential amount of radiation exposure, 
but provided a ``per unit'' estimate of between 80 to 525 person-rem. 
The NRC staff ultimately concluded, given the uncertainties in the 
scope of work and other nuclear plant site-specific factors such as 
source term and hazardous materials, that there was no basis to 
conclude that the NEI estimates were unreasonable. Therefore, since 
STPNOC's estimate of radiation exposure for insulation removal and 
replacement is within the NEI estimated range, the NRC staff considers 
STPNOC's estimate of an increase of 158-176 person-rem over the 
baseline exposure to be reasonable.
    As stated in the ``Occupational Radiation Doses'' section of this 
document, STPNOC's radiation protection program monitors radiation 
levels throughout the nuclear plant to establish appropriate work 
controls, training, temporary shielding, and protective equipment 
requirements so that worker doses are expected to remain within the 
dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201.
    In addition, as stated in the ``Offsite Radiation Dose'' section of 
this document, STPNOC also has a radiation monitoring system and 
procedures in place to control the release of radioactive effluents in 
accordance with radiation protection standards in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 
CFR part 190, and the ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR 
part 50. Therefore, radiation exposure to members of the public would 
be maintained within the NRC dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR 
part 190, and the ALARA dose objectives of appendix I to 10 CFR part 
50.

Conclusion

    Based on this information, impacts to members of the public from 
removing and replacing insulation within the reactor containment 
building would not be significant. However, impacts to plant workers 
and the environment from implementing this alternative would be greater 
than implementing the proposed action.
Alternative Use of Resources
    The proposed action would not involve the use of any different 
resources (e.g., water, air, land, nuclear fuel) not previously 
considered in NUREG-1437, Supplement 48.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
    In accordance with its stated policy, on April 7, 2016, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Texas State official, Mr. Robert Free, 
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The state 
official concurred with the EA and finding of no significant impact.

IV. Draft Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC is considering STPNOC's requests to amend Facility 
Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80 for STP, Units 1 and 2, and to 
grant exemptions for STP, Units 1 and 2, from certain requirements of 
10 CFR 50.46(a)(1), and 10 CFR part 50, appendix A, GDCs 35, 38, and 
41. This proposed action would not result in changes to radioactive 
effluents or emissions to nuclear plant workers and members of the 
public or any changes to radiological and non-radiological impacts to 
the environment. Therefore, the NRC has concluded that implementing the 
proposed action would result in no significant environmental effects, 
and that a draft Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. The 
NRC's draft EA, included in section III, ``Draft Environmental 
Assessment,'' of this document, is incorporated by reference into this 
finding.
    On the basis of the EA, 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.

V. Availability of Documents

    The documents identified in the following table are available for 
public inspection through the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) or by using one of the methods discussed in 
Section I.A, ``Obtaining Information,'' of this document.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Title                     Date        ADAMS Accession No.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
NUREG-0897, Containment Emergency          10/1985  ML112440046.
 Sump Performance: Technical
 Findings Related to Unresolved
 Safety Issue A-43, Revision 1.
NRC Generic Letter 2004-02,              9/13/2004  ML042360586.
 Potential Impact of Debris
 Blockage on Emergency
 Recirculation During Design Basis
 Accidents at Pressurized-Water
 Reactors.
NEI letter to NRC, Nuclear Energy       03/30/2012  ML12095A319.
 Institute, GSI-191 Dose Estimates.
Commission SECY-12-0093, Closure        07/09/2012  ML121320270
 Options for Generic Safety Issue-                   (package).
 191, Assessment of Debris
 Accumulation on Pressurized-Water
 Reactor Sump Performance.
Commission SRM-SECY-12-0093, Staff      12/14/2012  ML12349A378.
 Requirements--SECY-12-0093--Closu
 re Options for Generic Safety
 Issue-191, Assessment of Debris
 Accumulation on Pressurized-Water
 Reactor Sump Performance.
STPNOC letter to NRC, STP Pilot         01/31/2013  ML13043A013.
 Submittal and Request for
 Exemption for a Risk-Informed
 Approach to Resolve Generic
 Safety Issue (GSI)-191.
NRC letter to STPNOC, South Texas       04/01/2013  ML13066A519.
 Project, Units 1 and 2--
 Supplemental Information Needed
 for Acceptance of Requested
 Licensing Action Re: Request for
 Exemption for a Risk-Informed
 Approach to Resolve Generic
 Safety Issue 191.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Revised STP       06/19/2013  ML131750250
 Pilot Submittal and Requests for                    (package).
 Exemptions and License Amendment
 for a Risk-Informed Approach to
 Resolving Generic Safety Issue
 (GSI)-191.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Corrections       10/03/2013  ML13295A222.
 to Information Provided in
 Revised STP Pilot Submittal and
 Requests for Exemptions and
 License Amendment for a Risk-
 Informed Approach to Resolving
 Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191.

[[Page 26843]]

 
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      10/31/2013  ML13323A673
 GSI-191 Chemical Effects Test                       (package).
 Reports.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 1      11/13/2013  ML13323A128
 to Revised STP Pilot Submittal                      (package).
 and Requests for Exemptions and
 License Amendment for a Risk-
 Informed Approach to Resolving
 Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 1      11/21/2013  ML13338A165.
 to Revised STP Pilot Submittal
 for a Risk-Informed Approach to
 Resolving Generic Safety Issue
 (GSI)-191 to Supersede and
 Replace the Revised Pilot
 Submittal.
NUREG-1437, Supplement 48, Generic         11/2013  ML13322A890.
 Environmental Impact Statement
 for License Renewal of Nuclear
 Plants: Supplement 48 Regarding
 South Texas Project, Units 1 and
 2: Final Report.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       12/23/2013  ML14015A312.
 STP-GSI-191 EMCB-RAI-1.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       12/23/2013  ML14015A311.
 NRC Request for Reference
 Document For STP Risk-Informed
 GSI-191 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       03/17/2014  ML14086A383
 NRC Accident Dose Branch Request                    (package).
 for Additional Information.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to       01/09/2014  ML14029A533.
 Request for Additional
 Information re Use of RELAP5 in
 Analyses for Risk-Informed GSI-
 191 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      02/13/2014  ML14052A110
 CASA Grande Code and Analyses for                   (package, portions
 STP's Risk-Informed GSI-191                         redacted).
 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      02/27/2014  ML14072A075
 GSI-191 Chemical Effects Test                       (package).
 Reports.
NRC Letter to STPNOC, Request for       04/15/2014  ML14087A075.
 Additional Information, Round 1.
NUREG-0713, Volume 34,                     04/2014  ML14126A597.
 Occupational Radiation Exposure
 at Commercial Nuclear Power
 Reactors and Other Facilities
 2012: Forty-Fifth Annual Report.
NRC letter to STPNOC, Request for       03/03/2015  ML14357A171.
 Additional Information, Round 2.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Second            05/15/2014  ML14149A354.
 Submittal of CASA Grande Source
 Code for STP's Risk-Informed GSI-
 191 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, First Set of      05/22/2014  ML14149A439
 Responses to April, 2014,                           (package).
 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSl-191 Licensing
 Application--Revised.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Second Set        06/25/2014  ML14178A467
 of Responses to April, 2014,                        (package).
 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSI-191 Licensing
 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Third Set of      07/15/2014  ML14202A045.
 Responses to April, 2014,
 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSI-191 Licensing
 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of      03/10/2015  ML15072A092.
 Updated CASA Grande Input for
 STP's Risk-Informed GSI-191
 Licensing Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Description       03/25/2015  ML15091A440.
 of Revised Risk-Informed
 Methodology and Responses to
 Round 2 Requests for Additional
 Information Regarding STP Risk-
 Informed GSI-191 Licensing
 Application.
STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 2      08/20/2015  ML15246A125
 to STP Pilot Submittal and                          (package).
 Requests for Exemptions and
 License Amendment for a Risk-
 Informed Approach to Address
 Generic Safety Issue (GSI)-191
 and Respond to Generic Letter
 (GL) 2004-02.
NRC letter to STPNOC, Request for       04/11/2016  ML16082A507.
 Additional Information, Round 3.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day of April 2016.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert J. Pascarelli,
Chief, Plant Licensing Branch IV-I, Division of Operating Reactor 
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2016-10429 Filed 5-3-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P



                                                    26838                         Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices

                                                    Power (Applicant) has filed an                          licensing basis to incorporate the use of             Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
                                                    application for a COL with the NRC                      both a deterministic and a risk-informed              please contact the NRC’s Public
                                                    under Section 103 of the Atomic Energy                  approach to address safety issues                     Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
                                                    Act of 1954, as amended, and part 52 of                 discussed in Generic Safety Issue (GSI)–              1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
                                                    title 10 of the Code of Federal                         191 and to close Generic Letter (GL)                  email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. For the
                                                    Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Licenses,                       2004–02.                                              convenience of the reader, instructions
                                                    Certifications, and Approvals for                       DATES: Submit comments by June 20,                    about obtaining materials referenced in
                                                    Nuclear Power Plants.’’ Through the                     2016. Comments received after this date               this document are provided in a table in
                                                    Application, which is currently under                   will be considered if it is practical to do           the section of this notice entitled,
                                                    review by the NRC staff, the Applicant                  so, but the Commission is able to ensure              Availability of Documents.
                                                    seeks to construct and operate an                       consideration only for comments                         • NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
                                                    Economic Simplified Boiling-Water                       received before this date.                            purchase copies of public documents at
                                                    Reactor at the North Anna Power                                                                               the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
                                                                                                            ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
                                                    Station, which is located in Louisa                                                                           White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
                                                                                                            by any of the following methods (unless               Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
                                                    County, Virginia. An applicant may seek                 this document describes a different
                                                    a COL in accordance with subpart C of                   method for submitting comments on a                   B. Submitting Comments
                                                    10 CFR part 52. The information                         specific subject):
                                                    submitted by the applicant includes                                                                             Please include Docket ID NRC–2016–
                                                                                                               • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to               0092 in your comment submission.
                                                    certain administrative information, such                http://www.regulations.gov and search                   The NRC cautions you not to include
                                                    as financial qualifications submitted                   for Docket ID NRC–2016–0092. Address                  identifying or contact information that
                                                    pursuant to 10 CFR 52.77, as well as                    questions about NRC dockets to Carol                  you do not want to be publicly
                                                    technical information submitted                         Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;                   disclosed in your comment submission.
                                                    pursuant to 10 CFR 52.79. These notices                 email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For                   The NRC posts all comment
                                                    are being provided in accordance with                   technical questions, contact the                      submissions at http://
                                                    the requirements in 10 CFR 50.43(a)(3).                 individual listed in the FOR FURTHER                  www.regulations.gov as well as entering
                                                      Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day           INFORMATION CONTACT section of this                   the comment submissions into ADAMS.
                                                    of April, 2016.                                         document.                                             The NRC does not routinely edit
                                                      For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.                   • Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey,                  comment submissions to remove
                                                    Ronaldo V. Jenkins,                                     Office of Administration, Mail Stop:                  identifying or contact information.
                                                    Chief, Licensing Branch 3, Division of New              OWFN–12–H08, U.S. Nuclear                               If you are requesting or aggregating
                                                    Reactor Licensing, Office of New Reactors.              Regulatory Commission, Washington,                    comments from other persons for
                                                    [FR Doc. 2016–10428 Filed 5–3–16; 8:45 am]              DC 20555–0001.                                        submission to the NRC, then you should
                                                    BILLING CODE 7590–01–P                                     For additional direction on obtaining              inform those persons not to include
                                                                                                            information and submitting comments,                  identifying or contact information that
                                                                                                            see ‘‘Obtaining Information and                       they do not want to be publicly
                                                    NUCLEAR REGULATORY                                      Submitting Comments’’ in the                          disclosed in their comment submission.
                                                    COMMISSION                                              SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of                  Your request should state that the NRC
                                                                                                            this document.                                        does not routinely edit comment
                                                    [Docket Nos. 50–498 and 50–499; NRC–
                                                                                                            FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa                 submissions to remove such information
                                                    2016–0092]
                                                                                                            Regner, Office of Nuclear Reactor                     before making the comment
                                                    STP Nuclear Operating Company,                          Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory                   submissions available to the public or
                                                    South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2                      Commission, Washington DC 20555–                      entering the comment submissions into
                                                                                                            0001; telephone: 301–415–1906, email:                 ADAMS.
                                                    AGENCY:  Nuclear Regulatory                             Lisa.Regner@nrc.gov.
                                                    Commission.                                                                                                   II. Introduction and Background
                                                                                                            SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
                                                    ACTION: Draft environmental assessment                                                                           The NRC is considering a request to
                                                    and finding of no significant impact;                   I. Obtaining Information and                          amend Facility Operating Licenses
                                                    request for comment.                                    Submitting Comments                                   NPF–76 and NPF–80, issued to STPNOC
                                                                                                                                                                  for operation of STP, Units 1 and 2,
                                                    SUMMARY:   The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory                  A. Obtaining Information                              located in Matagorda County, Texas,
                                                    Commission (NRC) is issuing for public                     Please refer to Docket ID NRC–2016–                and to grant certain regulatory
                                                    comment a draft environmental                           0092 when contacting the NRC about                    exemptions for STP, Units 1 and 2, in
                                                    assessment (EA) prepared under the                      the availability of information for this              accordance with section 50.90,
                                                    National Environmental Policy Act of                    action. You may obtain publicly-                      ‘‘Application for amendment of license,
                                                    1969 (NEPA) and NRC regulations. This                   available information related to this                 construction permit, or early site
                                                    EA summarizes the results of the NRC                    action by any of the following methods:               permit’’ and section 50.12, ‘‘Specific
                                                    staff’s environmental review, which                        • Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to               exemptions,’’ of title 10 of the Code of
                                                    evaluates the potential environmental                   http://www.regulations.gov and search                 Federal Regulations (10 CFR),
                                                    impacts of issuing license amendments                   for Docket ID NRC–2016–0092.                          respectively. The license amendments
                                                    and granting regulatory exemptions in                      • NRC’s Agencywide Documents                       and regulatory exemptions would allow
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                    response to a request from STP Nuclear                  Access and Management System                          STPNOC to resolve concerns associated
                                                    Operating Company (STPNOC, the                          (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-                     with GSI–191, ‘‘Assessment of Debris
                                                    licensee) for Facility Operating License                available documents online in the                     Accumulation on PWR [Pressurized-
                                                    Nos. NPF–76 and NPF–80, for South                       ADAMS Public Documents collection at                  Water Reactor] Sump Performance,’’ and
                                                    Texas Project (STP), Units 1 and 2,                     http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/                        the associated GL 2004–02, ‘‘Potential
                                                    respectively. The license amendments                    adams.html. To begin the search, select               Impact of Debris Blockage on
                                                    and regulatory exemptions would allow                   ‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then                   Emergency Recirculation during Design
                                                    STPNOC to make changes to the STP                       select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS                        Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water


                                               VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:44 May 03, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00066   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM   04MYN1


                                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices                                              26839

                                                    Reactors,’’ issued on September 13,                     inside containment, and (3) implement                   exemption to 10 CFR 50.46(a)(1) for
                                                    2004.                                                   other compensatory measures in order                    certain conditions associated with the
                                                      Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.21, ‘‘Criteria                  to significantly reduce the risk of                     treatment of debris. Additionally,
                                                    for and identification of licensing and                 emergency sump strainer clogging.                       STPNOC requested exemptions to
                                                    regulatory actions requiring                               Subsequent to the issuance of GL                     appendix A to 10 CFR part 50, General
                                                    environmental assessments,’’ the NRC                    2004–02, the NRC staff identified                       Design Criteria (GDC) 35, ‘‘Emergency
                                                    has prepared a draft EA summarizing                     another related concern with the                        Core Cooling,’’ GDC 38, ‘‘Containment
                                                    the findings of its environmental NEPA                  potential for debris to bypass the sump                 Heat Removal,’’ and GDC 41,
                                                    review of this proposed action. The NRC                 strainers (even the new strainers) and                  ‘‘Containment Atmosphere Cleanup,’’ to
                                                    concluded that the proposed action will                 enter the reactor core. This safety issue               allow its use of a risk-informed
                                                    have no significant environmental                       could result in the build-up of material                approach for certain conditions in the
                                                    impact.                                                 on fuel assemblies, inhibit heat transfer,              containment debris analysis. If
                                                    Background                                              and prevent adequate cooling of the                     approved, the proposed action would
                                                                                                            reactor core. Since 2004, the NRC and                   not result in modifications within the
                                                       The NRC established a general safety                 industry have conducted tests to gain                   containment structure or changes to the
                                                    issue (GSI–191) to determine whether                    more information on this concern. In                    emergency core cooling system.
                                                    the transport and accumulation of                       2012, the NRC staff developed three
                                                    debris from a loss-of-coolant accident in               options for resolution of all of its debris             III. Draft Environmental Assessment
                                                    the PWR containment structure would                     concerns, which are discussed in SECY–                  Description of the Proposed Action
                                                    impede the operation of the emergency                   12–0093, ‘‘Closure Options for Generic
                                                    core cooling system or containment                                                                                 The proposed action is to issue
                                                                                                            Safety Issue 191, Assessment of Debris
                                                    spray system. A loss-of-coolant accident                                                                        certain license amendments and to grant
                                                                                                            Accumulation on Pressurized-Water
                                                    within the containment structure is                                                                             certain regulatory exemptions requested
                                                                                                            Reactor Sump Performance,’’ dated July
                                                    assumed to be caused by a break in the                                                                          by STPNOC. The license amendments
                                                                                                            9, 2012.1
                                                    primary coolant loop piping. Water                                                                              and regulatory exemptions would allow
                                                                                                               The three options for demonstrating
                                                    discharged from the pipe break would                                                                            STPNOC to make changes to the STP
                                                                                                            compliance with 10 CFR 50.46,
                                                    collect on the containment structure                                                                            licensing basis to incorporate the use of
                                                                                                            ‘‘Acceptance criteria for emergency core
                                                    floor and within the containment                                                                                both a deterministic and a risk-informed
                                                                                                            cooling systems for light-water nuclear
                                                    emergency sump. During this type of                                                                             approach to address safety issues
                                                                                                            power reactors,’’ are summarized as
                                                    accident, the emergency core cooling                                                                            discussed in GSI–191 and close GL
                                                                                                            follows.
                                                    systems and containment spray systems                                                                           2004–02. If approved, no physical
                                                                                                               1. Option 1 allows the use of
                                                    would initially draw cooling water from                                                                         modifications to the nuclear plant or
                                                                                                            approved models and test methods.
                                                    the refueling water storage tank.                          2. Option 2 allows the industry to                   changes to reactor operations involving
                                                    However, realigning the emergency core                  implement additional mitigating                         the emergency core cooling system
                                                    cooling system pumps to the                             measures until resolution is completed                  would be required. The proposed action
                                                    containment structure emergency sump                    and take additional time to resolve                     is in response to the licensee’s
                                                    would provide long-term cooling of the                  issues through further industry testing                 application dated June 19, 2013, and
                                                    reactor core. Therefore, successful long-               or use of a risk-informed approach. Use                 supplemented by letters dated October
                                                    term cooling depends on the ability of                  of this option has two alternative                      3, October 31, November 13, November
                                                    the containment structure emergency                     methods.                                                21, and December 23, 2013 (two letters);
                                                    sump to provide adequate flow to the                       • Option 2A: Industry can perform                    January 9, February 13, February 27,
                                                    residual heat removal recirculation                     more testing and analysis and submit a                  March 17, March 18, May 15 (two
                                                    pumps for extended periods of time.                     topical report for NRC review and                       letters), May 22, June 25, and July 15,
                                                       One of the concerns addressed by the                                                                         2014; and March 10, March 25, and
                                                                                                            approval.
                                                    implementation of GSI–191 is that                                                                               August 20, 2015.
                                                                                                               • Option 2B: Industry can develop a
                                                    debris, such as insulation installed on
                                                                                                            risk-informed approach to quantify the                  The Need for the Proposed Action
                                                    piping and components, within the
                                                                                                            risk associated with this generic issue
                                                    containment structure could be                                                                                    As the holder of Facility Operating
                                                                                                            and submit a license amendment
                                                    dislodged by a jet of water and steam                                                                           License Nos. NPF–76 and NPF–80,
                                                                                                            request for NRC review and approval.
                                                    from a loss-of-coolant accident. Water,                    3. Option 3 allows industry to                       STPNOC is expected to address the
                                                    along with debris, would accumulate at                  separate the regulatory treatment of the                safety issues discussed in GSI–191 and
                                                    the bottom of the containment structure                 sump strainer and in-vessel effects. The                to close GL 2004–02 with respect to
                                                    and would flow towards the emergency                    emergency core cooling system strainers                 STP, Units 1 and 2. Consistent with
                                                    sump pumps. Insulation and other                        will be evaluated using currently                       SECY–12–0093, STPNOC chose an
                                                    fibrous material could block the                        approved models, while in-vessel effects                approach which requires, in part, that
                                                    emergency sump screens and suction                      will be addressed using a risk-informed                 STPNOC request that the NRC amend
                                                    strainers, which in turn could prevent                  approach.                                               the operating licenses and grant certain
                                                    the ability of the containment                             STPNOC proposes to use Option 2B to                  regulatory exemptions for each unit.
                                                    emergency sump to provide adequate                      demonstrate compliance with 10 CFR                      Plant Site and Environs
                                                    flow to the residual heat removal                       50.46 through both plant-specific testing
                                                    recirculation pumps (for more                                                                                      The STP is located on approximately
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                            and a risk-informed approach (described
                                                    information, see NUREG–0897,                                                                                    12,220 acres (4,945 hectares) in rural
                                                                                                            in more detail in the following
                                                    ‘‘Containment Emergency Sump                                                                                    and sparsely populated Matagorda
                                                                                                            paragraphs). Since the use of a risk-
                                                    Performance,’’ Revision 1.                                                                                      County, Texas, approximately 70 miles
                                                                                                            informed approach is not recognized in
                                                       The NRC issued GL 2004–02 to                                                                                 (mi) [110 kilometers (km)] south-
                                                                                                            the regulations, STPNOC requested an
                                                    address this safety concern by requiring                                                                        southwest of Houston. Nearby
                                                    licensees of PWRs to: (1) Increase the                     1 On December 14, 2012, the Commission               communities include Matagorda,
                                                    size of their containment sump                          approved all three options for closure of this safety   approximately 8 mi (13 km) south of the
                                                    strainers, (2) replace fibrous insulation               issue.                                                  site; the City of Palacios, 11 mi (18 km)


                                               VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:44 May 03, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00067   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM   04MYN1


                                                    26840                         Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices

                                                    west of the site; and Bay City, 13 mi (21               Non-Radiological Cumulative Impacts                   recycle the liquids for use in plant
                                                    km) north of the site.                                     Since issuing the license amendments               systems. The principal objectives of the
                                                       The STP power plant consists of two                  and granting the regulatory exemptions                LWPS are to collect liquid wastes that
                                                    four-loop Westinghouse PWR units. The                   would not result in environmental                     may contain radioactive material and to
                                                    reactor core of each unit heats water,                  effects, there would be no cumulative                 maintain sufficient processing
                                                    which is pumped to four steam                           impact.                                               capability so that liquid waste may be
                                                    generators, where the heated water is                                                                         discharged to the environment below
                                                    converted to steam. The steam is then                   Radiological Impacts                                  the regulatory limits of 10 CFR 20.1301
                                                    used to turn turbines, which are                        Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid                        and consistent with the ALARA dose
                                                    connected to electrical generators that                 Effluents and Solid Waste                             objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part
                                                    produce electricity. A simplified                                                                             50. The waste is routed through a
                                                    drawing of a PWR can be viewed at                          The STP uses waste treatment systems               monitor that measures the radioactivity
                                                    http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/pwrs.html.                  to collect, process, recycle, and dispose             and can automatically terminate the
                                                                                                            of gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes that             release in the event radioactivity
                                                       The reactor, steam generators, and
                                                                                                            contain radioactive material in a safe                exceeds predetermined levels. The
                                                    other components are housed in a
                                                                                                            and controlled manner within NRC and                  liquid waste is discharged into the main
                                                    concrete and steel containment
                                                                                                            Environmental Protection Agency                       cooling reservoir. The entire main
                                                    structure (building). The containment
                                                                                                            radiation safety standards. Issuing the               cooling reservoir is within the STP site
                                                    structure is a reinforced concrete
                                                                                                            license amendments and granting the                   boundary and the public is prohibited
                                                    cylinder with a concrete slab base and
                                                                                                            regulatory exemptions will not result in              from access to the area.
                                                    hemispherical dome. A welded steel
                                                                                                            any physical changes to the nuclear                      Issuing the license amendments and
                                                    liner is attached to the inside face of the
                                                                                                            plant or reactor operations that would                granting the regulatory exemptions will
                                                    concrete shell to ensure a high degree of
                                                                                                            affect the types and quantities of                    not result in any physical changes to the
                                                    leak tightness. In addition, the 4-foot
                                                                                                            radioactive material generated during                 nuclear plant or reactor operations;
                                                    (1.2-meter)–thick concrete walls of the
                                                                                                            plant operations; therefore, there will be            therefore, there will be no changes to
                                                    containment structure serve as a
                                                                                                            no changes to the plant radioactive                   the LWPS. The existing equipment and
                                                    radiation shield. Additional information
                                                                                                            waste treatment systems. A detailed                   plant procedures that control
                                                    on the plant structures and systems, as
                                                                                                            description of the STP radioactive waste              radioactive releases to the environment
                                                    well as the environmental impact
                                                                                                            handling and disposal activities is                   will continue to be used to maintain
                                                    statement for license renewal, can be
                                                                                                            contained in Chapter 2.1.2 of                         radioactive liquid releases within the
                                                    found in NUREG–1437, Supplement 48,
                                                                                                            Supplement 48 to NUREG–1437.                          dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 and the
                                                    ‘‘Generic Environmental Impact
                                                                                                                                                                  ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to
                                                    Statement for License Renewal of                        Radioactive Gaseous Effluents
                                                                                                                                                                  10 CFR part 50.
                                                    Nuclear Plants: Supplement 48                              The objectives of the STP gaseous
                                                    Regarding South Texas Project, Units 1                  waste management system (GWMS) are                    Radioactive Solid Wastes
                                                    and 2.’’                                                to process and control the release of                   The function of the STP solid waste
                                                    Environmental Impacts of the Proposed                   radioactive gaseous effluents into the                processing system (SWPS) is to process,
                                                    Action                                                  environment to be within the                          package, and store the solid radioactive
                                                                                                            requirements of 10 CFR 20.1301, ‘‘Dose                wastes generated by nuclear plant
                                                      Radiological and non-radiological                     limits for individual members of the                  operations until they are shipped off site
                                                    impacts on the environment that may                     public,’’ and to be consistent with the as            to a vendor for further processing or for
                                                    result from issuing the license                         low as is reasonably achievable                       permanent disposal at a licensed burial
                                                    amendments and granting the regulatory                  (ALARA) dose objectives set forth in                  facility, or both. The storage areas have
                                                    exemptions are summarized in the                        appendix I to 10 CFR part 50. The                     restricted access and shielding to reduce
                                                    following sections.                                     GWMS is designed so that radiation                    radiation rates to plant workers. The
                                                    Non-Radiological Impacts                                exposure to plant workers is within the               principal objectives of the SWPS are to
                                                                                                            dose limits in 10 CFR 20.1201,                        package and transport the waste in
                                                       No physical modifications to the                     ‘‘Occupational dose limits for adults.’’              compliance with NRC regulations in 10
                                                    nuclear plant or changes to reactor                        Issuing the license amendments and                 CFR part 61, ‘‘Licensing Requirements
                                                    operations involving the emergency core                 granting the regulatory exemptions will               for Land Disposal of Radioactive
                                                    cooling system would be required if the                 not result in any physical changes to the             Waste,’’ and 10 CFR part 71, ‘‘Packaging
                                                    NRC were to issue the requested license                 nuclear plant or reactor operations;                  and Transportation of Radioactive
                                                    amendments and grant the regulatory                     therefore, there will be no changes to                Material,’’ and the U.S. Department of
                                                    exemptions. Also, no physical changes                   the GWMS. The existing equipment and                  Transportation regulations in 49 CFR
                                                    would be made to other structures or                    plant procedures that control                         parts 170 through 179; and to maintain
                                                    land use within the STP site. Non-                      radioactive releases to the environment               the dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1201, 10
                                                    radiological liquid effluents or gaseous                will continue to be used to maintain                  CFR 20.1301, and appendix I to 10 CFR
                                                    emissions would not change and                          radioactive gaseous releases within the               part 50.
                                                    therefore environmental conditions at                   dose limits of 10 CFR 20.1301 and the                   Issuing the license amendments and
                                                    the STP site also would not change. In                  ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to                granting the regulatory exemptions will
                                                    addition, issuing the license                                                                                 not result in any physical changes to the
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                                                                            10 CFR part 50.
                                                    amendments and granting the regulatory                                                                        nuclear plant or reactor operations;
                                                    exemptions would not result in changes                  Radioactive Liquid Effluents                          therefore, the waste can be handled by
                                                    to the use of resources or cause any new                  The function of the STP liquid waste                the SWPS without modification. The
                                                    environmental impacts.                                  processing system (LWPS) is to collect                existing equipment and plant
                                                       Therefore, there would be no non-                    and process radioactive liquid wastes to              procedures that control radioactive solid
                                                    radiological environmental impacts to                   reduce radioactivity and chemical                     waste handling will continue to be used
                                                    any resource or any irreversible and                    concentrations to levels acceptable for               to maintain exposures within the dose
                                                    irretrievable commitments of resources.                 discharge to the environment or to                    limits of 10 CFR 20.1201, 10 CFR


                                               VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:44 May 03, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00068   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM   04MYN1


                                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices                                             26841

                                                    20.1301, and 10 CFR part 50 appendix                    the proposed action of issuing the                    compliance with the Commission’s
                                                    I.                                                      license amendments and granting the                   regulations, and (3) not be inimical to
                                                                                                            exemption requests to ensure that,                    the common defense and security or to
                                                    Occupational Radiation Doses
                                                                                                            following the proposed action, the                    the health and safety of the public, then
                                                       The proposed action of issuing the                   licensee will continue to meet the NRC                the proposed action will not have a
                                                    license amendments and granting the                     regulatory requirements for safe                      significant radiological impact.
                                                    regulatory exemptions will not result in                operation. The results and conclusion of
                                                    any physical changes being made to the                                                                        Environmental Impacts of the
                                                                                                            the NRC staff’s safety review will be
                                                    nuclear plant or reactor operations;                                                                          Alternatives to the Proposed Action
                                                                                                            documented in a publicly available
                                                    therefore, there will be no change to any               safety evaluation. If the NRC staff                      As discussed earlier, licensees have
                                                    in-plant radiation sources. The                         concludes in this safety evaluation that              options in responding to GL 2004–02
                                                    licensee’s radiation protection program                 taking the proposed action will (1)                   and demonstrating compliance with 10
                                                    monitors radiation levels throughout the                provide reasonable assurance that the                 CFR 50.46 to consider the impacts of
                                                    nuclear plant to establish appropriate                  health and safety of the public will not              debris on emergency core cooling
                                                    work controls, training, temporary                      be endangered by operation in the                     system. Consistent with these options,
                                                    shielding, and protective equipment                     proposed manner, (2) provide                          as an alternative to the proposed action,
                                                    requirements so that worker doses will                  reasonable assurance that such activities             the licensee could choose to remove and
                                                    remain within the dose limits of 10 CFR                 will be conducted in compliance with                  replace insulation within the reactor
                                                    part 20, subpart C, ‘‘Occupational Dose                 the Commission’s regulations, and (3)                 containment building. This would
                                                    Limits.’’ Issuing the license                           not be inimical to the common defense                 require the physical removal and
                                                    amendments and granting the regulatory                  and security or to the health and safety              disposal of significant amounts of
                                                    exemptions will not change radiation                    of the public, then the proposed action               insulation from a radiation area within
                                                    levels within the nuclear plant and,                    will also not have a significant                      the reactor containment building and
                                                    therefore, will have no increased                       environmental impact. The NRC will                    the installation of new insulation less
                                                    radiological impact to the workers.                     not take the proposed action absent                   likely to impact sump performance.
                                                                                                            such a safety conclusion.                                Removal of the existing insulation
                                                    Offsite Radiation Dose                                                                                        from the containment building would
                                                       The primary sources of offsite dose to               Radiological Cumulative Impacts                       generate radiologically contaminated
                                                    members of the public from the STP are                     The radiological dose limits for                   waste. STPNOC estimated that 4,620
                                                    radioactive gaseous and liquid effluents.               protection of the public and plant                    cubic feet of insulation would be
                                                    As discussed previously, there will be                  workers have been developed by the                    removed and stored onsite until
                                                    no change to the operation of the STP                   NRC and the Environmental Protection                  disposal. The old insulation would
                                                    radioactive gaseous and liquid waste                    Agency to address the cumulative                      require special handling and packaging
                                                    management systems or the ability to                    impact of acute and long-term exposure                so that it could be safely transported
                                                    perform their intended functions. Also,                 to radiation and radioactive material.                from the STP site. The licensee’s
                                                    there will be no change to the STP                      These dose limits are codified in 10 CFR              existing low-level radioactive and
                                                    radiation monitoring system and                         part 20, ‘‘Standards for Protection                   hazardous waste handling and disposal
                                                    procedures used to control the release of               Against Radiation,’’ and 40 CFR part                  activities would likely be used to
                                                    radioactive effluents in accordance with                190.                                                  process and store this waste material.
                                                    radiation protection standards in 10                       Cumulative radiation doses are                     The old insulation would then be
                                                    CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR 190,                                required to be within the limits set forth            transported to a low-level radioactive or
                                                    ‘‘Environmental Radiation Protection                    in the regulations cited in the previous              hazardous waste disposal site. Energy
                                                    Standards for Nuclear Power                             paragraph. Issuing the license                        (fuel) would be expended to transport
                                                    Operations,’’ and the ALARA dose                        amendments and granting the                           the insulation and land would be
                                                    objectives in appendix I to 10 CFR part                 exemptions will not require any                       expended at the disposal site.
                                                    50.                                                     physical changes to the plant or plant                   The removal of the old insulation and
                                                       Based on the previous statements, the                activities, there will not be changes to              installation of the new insulation would
                                                    offsite radiation dose to members of the                in-plant radiation sources, and offsite               expose workers to radiation. In its
                                                    public would not change and would                       radiation dose to members of the public               application, STPNOC estimates that this
                                                    continue to be within regulatory limits,                will not change. Therefore, the NRC                   would result in an additional collective
                                                    and, therefore, issuing the license                     staff concludes that there would not be               radiation exposure of 158–176 person-
                                                    amendments and granting the regulatory                  a significant cumulative radiological                 roentgen equivalent man (rem) over its
                                                    exemptions will not change offsite dose                 impact from the proposed action.                      baseline collective radiation exposure.
                                                    levels and, consequently, the health                                                                          The NRC staff reviewed NUREG–0713,
                                                                                                            Radiological Impacts Summary                          Volume 34, ‘‘Occupational Radiation
                                                    effects of the proposed action will not
                                                    be significant.                                            Based on these radiological                        Exposure at Commercial Nuclear Power
                                                                                                            evaluations, the proposed action of                   Reactors and Other Facilities 2012:
                                                    Design-Basis Accidents                                  issuing the license amendments and                    Forty-Fifth Annual Report,’’ and
                                                      Design-basis accidents at STP, Units 1                granting the exemptions would not                     determined that STPNOC’s average
                                                    and 2, are evaluated by both the licensee               result in any significant radiological                baseline collective radiation exposure is
                                                    and the NRC to ensure that the units can                impacts. Therefore, if the NRC staff                  approximately 90 person-rem. This
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                    withstand the spectrum of postulated                    concludes in its separate safety                      additional 158–176 person-rem
                                                    accidents without undue hazard to the                   evaluation that taking the proposed                   collective exposure would be shared
                                                    public health and safety and the                        action will (1) provide reasonable                    across the entire work force involved
                                                    protection of the environment.                          assurance that the health and safety of               with removing and reinstalling
                                                      Separate from its environmental                       the public will not be endangered by                  insulation.
                                                    review in this EA, the NRC staff is                     operation in the proposed manner, (2)                    In SECY–12–0093, the NRC staff
                                                    evaluating the licensee’s technical and                 provide reasonable assurance that such                attempted to develop a total
                                                    safety analyses provided in support of                  activities will be conducted in                       occupational dose estimate for the work


                                               VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:44 May 03, 2016   Jkt 238001   PO 00000   Frm 00069   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM   04MYN1


                                                    26842                         Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices

                                                    involved in insulation removal and                        remain within the dose limits of 10 CFR               IV. Draft Finding of No Significant
                                                    replacement associated with GSI–191.                      20.1201.                                              Impact
                                                    Due to uncertainties in the scope of                        In addition, as stated in the ‘‘Offsite
                                                    work required to remove and replace                       Radiation Dose’’ section of this                        The NRC is considering STPNOC’s
                                                    insulation at a specific nuclear plant                    document, STPNOC also has a radiation                 requests to amend Facility Operating
                                                    and other site-specific factors such as                   monitoring system and procedures in                   License Nos. NPF–76 and NPF–80 for
                                                    source term and hazardous materials,                      place to control the release of                       STP, Units 1 and 2, and to grant
                                                    the NRC staff was unable to estimate the                  radioactive effluents in accordance with              exemptions for STP, Units 1 and 2, from
                                                    total occupational dose associated with                   radiation protection standards in 10                  certain requirements of 10 CFR
                                                    this work. However, dose estimates                        CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR part 190, and the                 50.46(a)(1), and 10 CFR part 50,
                                                    were provided by the Nuclear Energy                       ALARA dose objectives in appendix I to                appendix A, GDCs 35, 38, and 41. This
                                                    Institute (NEI) in a letter to the NRC                    10 CFR part 50. Therefore, radiation                  proposed action would not result in
                                                    dated March 30, 2012, based on                            exposure to members of the public                     changes to radioactive effluents or
                                                    information collected on occupational                     would be maintained within the NRC                    emissions to nuclear plant workers and
                                                    radiation exposures that have been, or                    dose criteria in 10 CFR 20.1301, 40 CFR               members of the public or any changes
                                                    could be, incurred during insulation                      part 190, and the ALARA dose                          to radiological and non-radiological
                                                    removal and replacement. In the letter,                   objectives of appendix I to 10 CFR part               impacts to the environment. Therefore,
                                                    NEI noted similar difficulties to those                   50.                                                   the NRC has concluded that
                                                    experienced by the NRC staff in                           Conclusion                                            implementing the proposed action
                                                    estimating the potential amount of                                                                              would result in no significant
                                                    radiation exposure, but provided a ‘‘per                    Based on this information, impacts to
                                                                                                                                                                    environmental effects, and that a draft
                                                                                                              members of the public from removing
                                                    unit’’ estimate of between 80 to 525                                                                            Finding of No Significant Impact is
                                                                                                              and replacing insulation within the
                                                    person-rem. The NRC staff ultimately                                                                            appropriate. The NRC’s draft EA,
                                                                                                              reactor containment building would not
                                                    concluded, given the uncertainties in                                                                           included in section III, ‘‘Draft
                                                                                                              be significant. However, impacts to
                                                    the scope of work and other nuclear                                                                             Environmental Assessment,’’ of this
                                                                                                              plant workers and the environment from
                                                    plant site-specific factors such as source                                                                      document, is incorporated by reference
                                                                                                              implementing this alternative would be
                                                    term and hazardous materials, that there                                                                        into this finding.
                                                                                                              greater than implementing the proposed
                                                    was no basis to conclude that the NEI
                                                                                                              action.                                                 On the basis of the EA, the NRC
                                                    estimates were unreasonable. Therefore,
                                                                                                              Alternative Use of Resources                          concludes that the proposed action will
                                                    since STPNOC’s estimate of radiation
                                                                                                                                                                    not have a significant effect on the
                                                    exposure for insulation removal and                         The proposed action would not
                                                    replacement is within the NEI estimated                                                                         quality of the human environment.
                                                                                                              involve the use of any different                      Accordingly, the NRC has determined
                                                    range, the NRC staff considers                            resources (e.g., water, air, land, nuclear
                                                    STPNOC’s estimate of an increase of                                                                             not to prepare an environmental impact
                                                                                                              fuel) not previously considered in                    statement for the proposed action.
                                                    158–176 person-rem over the baseline                      NUREG–1437, Supplement 48.
                                                    exposure to be reasonable.                                                                                      V. Availability of Documents
                                                       As stated in the ‘‘Occupational                        Agencies and Persons Consulted
                                                    Radiation Doses’’ section of this                           In accordance with its stated policy,                 The documents identified in the
                                                    document, STPNOC’s radiation                              on April 7, 2016, the NRC staff                       following table are available for public
                                                    protection program monitors radiation                     consulted with the Texas State official,              inspection through the NRC’s
                                                    levels throughout the nuclear plant to                    Mr. Robert Free, regarding the                        Agencywide Documents Access and
                                                    establish appropriate work controls,                      environmental impact of the proposed                  Management System (ADAMS) or by
                                                    training, temporary shielding, and                        action. The state official concurred with             using one of the methods discussed in
                                                    protective equipment requirements so                      the EA and finding of no significant                  Section I.A, ‘‘Obtaining Information,’’ of
                                                    that worker doses are expected to                         impact.                                               this document.

                                                                                                 Title                                                       Date                 ADAMS Accession No.

                                                    NUREG–0897, Containment Emergency Sump Performance: Technical Findings                                    10/1985    ML112440046.
                                                      Related to Unresolved Safety Issue A–43, Revision 1.
                                                    NRC Generic Letter 2004–02, Potential Impact of Debris Blockage on Emergency                             9/13/2004   ML042360586.
                                                      Recirculation During Design Basis Accidents at Pressurized-Water Reactors.
                                                    NEI letter to NRC, Nuclear Energy Institute, GSI–191 Dose Estimates .....................              03/30/2012    ML12095A319.
                                                    Commission SECY–12–0093, Closure Options for Generic Safety Issue–191, As-                             07/09/2012    ML121320270 (package).
                                                      sessment of Debris Accumulation on Pressurized-Water Reactor Sump Perform-
                                                      ance.
                                                    Commission SRM–SECY–12–0093, Staff Requirements—SECY–12–0093—Clo-                                      12/14/2012    ML12349A378.
                                                      sure Options for Generic Safety Issue–191, Assessment of Debris Accumulation
                                                      on Pressurized-Water Reactor Sump Performance.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, STP Pilot Submittal and Request for Exemption for a Risk-                        01/31/2013    ML13043A013.
                                                      Informed Approach to Resolve Generic Safety Issue (GSI)–191.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                    NRC letter to STPNOC, South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2—Supplemental Infor-                           04/01/2013    ML13066A519.
                                                      mation Needed for Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Re: Request for
                                                      Exemption for a Risk-Informed Approach to Resolve Generic Safety Issue 191.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Revised STP Pilot Submittal and Requests for Exemptions                          06/19/2013    ML131750250 (package).
                                                      and License Amendment for a Risk-Informed Approach to Resolving Generic
                                                      Safety Issue (GSI)–191.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Corrections to Information Provided in Revised STP Pilot                         10/03/2013    ML13295A222.
                                                      Submittal and Requests for Exemptions and License Amendment for a Risk-In-
                                                      formed Approach to Resolving Generic Safety Issue (GSI)–191.



                                               VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:44 May 03, 2016   Jkt 238001     PO 00000   Frm 00070   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM   04MYN1


                                                                                  Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 86 / Wednesday, May 4, 2016 / Notices                                                        26843

                                                                                                 Title                                                       Date                   ADAMS Accession No.

                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of GSI–191 Chemical Effects Test Reports .........                     10/31/2013    ML13323A673 (package).
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 1 to Revised STP Pilot Submittal and Re-                              11/13/2013    ML13323A128 (package).
                                                      quests for Exemptions and License Amendment for a Risk-Informed Approach to
                                                      Resolving Generic Safety Issue (GSI)–191.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 1 to Revised STP Pilot Submittal for a Risk-In-                       11/21/2013    ML13338A165.
                                                      formed Approach to Resolving Generic Safety Issue (GSI)–191 to Supersede
                                                      and Replace the Revised Pilot Submittal.
                                                    NUREG–1437, Supplement 48, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Li-                                 11/2013    ML13322A890.
                                                      cense Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplement 48 Regarding South Texas
                                                      Project, Units 1 and 2: Final Report.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to STP–GSI–191 EMCB–RAI–1 ..........................                    12/23/2013    ML14015A312.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to NRC Request for Reference Document For                               12/23/2013    ML14015A311.
                                                      STP Risk-Informed GSI–191 Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to NRC Accident Dose Branch Request for Ad-                             03/17/2014    ML14086A383 (package).
                                                      ditional Information.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Response to Request for Additional Information re Use of                         01/09/2014    ML14029A533.
                                                      RELAP5 in Analyses for Risk-Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of CASA Grande Code and Analyses for STP’s                             02/13/2014    ML14052A110 (package,            portions   re-
                                                      Risk-Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.                                                                        dacted).
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of GSI–191 Chemical Effects Test Reports .........                     02/27/2014    ML14072A075 (package).
                                                    NRC Letter to STPNOC, Request for Additional Information, Round 1 ......................               04/15/2014    ML14087A075.
                                                    NUREG–0713, Volume 34, Occupational Radiation Exposure at Commercial Nu-                                  04/2014    ML14126A597.
                                                      clear Power Reactors and Other Facilities 2012: Forty-Fifth Annual Report.
                                                    NRC letter to STPNOC, Request for Additional Information, Round 2 .......................              03/03/2015    ML14357A171.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Second Submittal of CASA Grande Source Code for STP’s                            05/15/2014    ML14149A354.
                                                      Risk-Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, First Set of Responses to April, 2014, Requests for Addi-                        05/22/2014    ML14149A439 (package).
                                                      tional Information Regarding STP Risk-Informed GSl–191 Licensing Application—
                                                      Revised.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Second Set of Responses to April, 2014, Requests for Ad-                         06/25/2014    ML14178A467 (package).
                                                      ditional Information Regarding STP Risk-Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Third Set of Responses to April, 2014, Requests for Addi-                        07/15/2014    ML14202A045.
                                                      tional Information Regarding STP Risk-Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Submittal of Updated CASA Grande Input for STP’s Risk-                           03/10/2015    ML15072A092.
                                                      Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Description of Revised Risk-Informed Methodology and                             03/25/2015    ML15091A440.
                                                      Responses to Round 2 Requests for Additional Information Regarding STP Risk-
                                                      Informed GSI–191 Licensing Application.
                                                    STPNOC letter to NRC, Supplement 2 to STP Pilot Submittal and Requests for Ex-                         08/20/2015    ML15246A125 (package).
                                                      emptions and License Amendment for a Risk-Informed Approach to Address Ge-
                                                      neric Safety Issue (GSI)–191 and Respond to Generic Letter (GL) 2004–02.
                                                    NRC letter to STPNOC, Request for Additional Information, Round 3 .......................              04/11/2016    ML16082A507.



                                                       Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 26th day            comment, and takes other                              Services 3 (GEPS 3) negotiated service
                                                    of April 2016.                                            administrative steps.                                 agreement (Agreement).1
                                                       For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.                 DATES: Comments are due: May 6, 2016.                    To support its Notice, the Postal
                                                    Robert J. Pascarelli,                                     ADDRESSES: Submit comments                            Service filed a copy of the Agreement,
                                                    Chief, Plant Licensing Branch IV–I, Division              electronically via the Commission’s                   a copy of the Governors’ Decision
                                                    of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of                 Filing Online system at http://                       authorizing the product, a certification
                                                    Nuclear Reactor Regulation.                               www.prc.gov. Those who cannot submit                  of compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a),
                                                    [FR Doc. 2016–10429 Filed 5–3–16; 8:45 am]                comments electronically should contact                and an application for non-public
                                                    BILLING CODE 7590–01–P                                    the person identified in the FOR FURTHER              treatment of certain materials. It also
                                                                                                              INFORMATION CONTACT section by                        filed supporting financial workpapers.
                                                                                                              telephone for advice on filing                        II. Notice of Commission Action
                                                                                                              alternatives.
                                                    POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION                                                                                      The Commission establishes Docket
                                                                                                              FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:                      No. CP2016–157 for consideration of
                                                    [Docket No. CP2016–157; Order No. 3268]                   David A. Trissell, General Counsel, at                matters raised by the Notice.
                                                                                                              202–789–6820.                                           The Commission invites comments on
                                                    New Postal Product                                        SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:                            whether the Postal Service’s filing is
                                                              Postal Regulatory Commission.                   Table of Contents                                     consistent with 39 U.S.C. 3632, 3633, or
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES




                                                    AGENCY:
                                                                                                                                                                    3642, 39 CFR part 3015, and 39 CFR
                                                    ACTION:   Notice.                                         I. Introduction                                       part 3020, subpart B. Comments are due
                                                                                                              II. Notice of Commission Action
                                                    SUMMARY:   The Commission is noticing a                   III. Ordering Paragraphs                              no later than May 6, 2016. The public
                                                    recent Postal Service filing concerning
                                                    notice to enter into an additional Global                 I. Introduction                                         1 Notice of United States Postal Service of Filing

                                                                                                                                                                    a Functionally Equivalent Global Expedited
                                                    Expedited Package Services 3 negotiated                      On April 28, 2016, the Postal Service              Package Services 3 Negotiated Service Agreement
                                                    service agreement. This notice informs                    filed notice that it has entered into an              and Application for Non-Public Treatment of
                                                    the public of the filing, invites public                  additional Global Expedited Package                   Materials Filed Under Seal, April 28, 2016 (Notice).



                                               VerDate Sep<11>2014   18:44 May 03, 2016   Jkt 238001     PO 00000   Frm 00071   Fmt 4703   Sfmt 4703   E:\FR\FM\04MYN1.SGM   04MYN1



Document Created: 2016-05-04 01:23:16
Document Modified: 2016-05-04 01:23:16
CategoryRegulatory Information
CollectionFederal Register
sudoc ClassAE 2.7:
GS 4.107:
AE 2.106:
PublisherOffice of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration
SectionNotices
ActionDraft environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; request for comment.
DatesSubmit comments by June 20, 2016. Comments received after this date will be considered if it is practical to do so, but the Commission is able to ensure consideration only for comments received before this date.
ContactLisa Regner, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555- 0001; telephone: 301-415-1906, email: [email protected]
FR Citation81 FR 26838 

2024 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR