[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67784-67788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27764]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 52-012 and 52-013; NRC-2010-0343]
STP Nuclear Operating Company South Texas Project Electric
Generating Station, Units 3 and 4 Request for Exemption Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
By letters dated March 23, 2010 (STPNOC 2010a), and July 21, 2010
(STPNOC 2010b), STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) submitted a
request for an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Section 50.10: License required; limited
work authorization. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the
staff) is considering issuance of this exemption as it relates to
STPNOC's application for combined licenses (COLs) for South Texas
Project Electric Generating Station (STP) Units 3 and 4, which is
currently under review by the NRC. The exemption would authorize STPNOC
to install two crane foundation
[[Page 67785]]
retaining walls (CFRWs) prior to issuance of the COLs. Granting this
exemption would not constitute a commitment by the NRC to issue COLs
for STP Units 3 and 4; STPNOC would install the CFRWs assuming the risk
that its COL application may later be denied. NRC has prepared this
environmental assessment (EA) for the exemption request in accordance
with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21. Based on this EA, the NRC has
reached a Finding of No Significant Impact. The details of the NRC
staff's safety review of the exemption request will be provided in the
safety evaluation document associated with that determination.
Environmental Assessment
Background
By letter dated January 8, 2010, the NRC notified STPNOC that
installation of the CFRWs was considered construction under 10 CFR
50.10(a)(1), therefore requiring issuance of a limited work
authorization (LWA) or COLs before their installation (NRC 2010a). In
accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(b), STPNOC has requested an exemption that
would permit the construction of the CFRWs prior to the issuance of
COLs for STP Units 3 and 4 (STPNOC 2010).
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action, as described in STPNOC's request for an
exemption to 10 CFR 50.10, would allow STPNOC to install two CFRWs for
STP Units 3 and 4, prior to issuance of COLs. According to STPNOC, the
CFRWs are non-safety related, reinforced concrete walls that would
facilitate excavation activities by retaining soil next to permanent
plant structures in the excavations. STPNOC states that the CFRWs are
required to accommodate the reach of a heavy-lift crane needed to place
reactor components into the excavations. Installation of the CFRWs
would include the following activities:
A full-depth and -width slurry excavation would be made,
with the excavation maintained by the slurry;
Reinforcing would be placed in the slurry-filled trench;
Concrete would be placed in the slurry-filled trench from
the bottom-up; and
Tiebacks and whalers would be installed to stabilize the
CFRWs, as excavation for permanent plant structures proceeds.
As construction of the permanent plant structures proceeds, the
CFRWs would be abandoned in place following crane use. After
abandonment, the CFRWs would have no function during operation of STP
Units 3 and 4.
Need for the Proposed Action
In its exemption request, STPNOC stated that the proposed exemption
is needed because installation of the CFRWs must occur before
excavation for permanent plant structures, and compliance with 10 CFR
50.10, i.e., obtaining an LWA, would result in undue hardship or other
costs that are significantly in excess of those contemplated during the
2007 LWA rulemaking. According to the exemption request, installation
of the CFRWs is needed to allow STPNOC to complete certain on-site
activities in parallel with the licensing process, so that it can begin
construction promptly upon issuance of COLs.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of STPNOC's proposed
installation of the CFRWs, including the non-radiological and
radiological impacts that may result from granting the requested
exemption. This evaluation is based on STPNOC's exemption request,
dated March 23, 2010, and on information provided by STPNOC in support
of its COL application for proposed STP Units 3 and 4, primarily
Revision 3 of the environmental report (ER) (STPNOC 2009). According to
STPNOC's exemption request, the environmental impacts of installing the
CFRWs are within the scope of preconstruction activities described in
Chapters 3 and 4 of STP Units 3 and 4 ER. Certain facilities, such as a
concrete batch plant, lay down areas, parking lots, and temporary
buildings, would be required for preconstruction activities at the STP
site, and as such, are not exclusive to the installation of the CFRWs.
It is expected that these facilities would already be in place and
supporting preconstruction activities, and as such, this EA does not
include the environmental impacts of such facilities.
Description of the Site
The STP site is located in a rural area of Matagorda County, Texas,
approximately 10 miles (mi) north of Matagorda Bay, 70 mi south-
southwest of Houston, and 12 mi south-southwest of Bay City. The
proposed location of STP Units 3 and 4 is within the site boundaries of
the existing STP Units 1 and 2, approximately 1,500 feet (ft) north and
2,150 ft west of the center of Units 1 and 2. The STP site comprises
12,220 acres (ac) immediately west of the Colorado River, approximately
10 mi upstream of the river's confluence with Matagorda Bay. The Main
Cooling Reservoir, a man-made impoundment that is the normal heat sink
for waste heat generated by STP Units 1 and 2, occupies approximately
7,000 ac of the STP site, and about 1,750 ac are currently occupied by
Units 1 and 2 and associated facilities. The remainder of the site is
undeveloped land or is used for agriculture and cattle grazing. The
area that would be affected on a long-term basis as a result of
permanent facilities for proposed Units 3 and 4 would be approximately
300 ac. An additional approximately 240 ac would be disturbed for
temporary construction facilities.
Nonradiological Impacts
Land Use Impacts
Installation of each CFRW would disturb an area approximately 890
ft long by 13 ft wide, which is approximately 23,140 square ft (0.54
ac) for both CFRWs. This would be a minor portion of the 12,220-ac STP
site, and would be located in an area that was previously disturbed
during construction of STP Units 1 and 2. As such, the NRC staff
concludes that land use impacts from installation of the CFRWs would
not be significant.
Surface and Groundwater Impacts
Installation of the CFRWs would have insignificant impacts on
groundwater flow and surface water quality. While the purpose of the
CFRWs is for building Units 3 and 4, they would remain in place after
construction and could slightly reduce the permeability of the affected
area. The completed CFRWs would each be approximately 3 ft wide, 890 ft
long and 80 ft deep. In the vicinity of the STP site, the Shallow
Aquifer's base is between 90 and 150 ft below ground surface (STPNOC
2009). Because there would be a gap between the bottom of the CFRWs and
the top of the Shallow Aquifer, groundwater flow would not be
significantly impacted.
Sediment carried with stormwater from the disturbed areas could
impact surface water quality. STPNOC would be required to implement
environmental controls specified in its Clean Water Act Section 402(p)
Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) general permit for
construction of STP Units 3 and 4 (STPNOC 2009). In its exemption
request, STPNOC has stated that it would employ best management
practices (BMPs) during installation of the CFRWs in accordance with
these regulatory and permit requirements (STPNOC 2010), which would
limit the impacts of ground disturbance to surface water quality. BMPs
would be
[[Page 67786]]
described in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would
be submitted to and approved by the Texas Council on Environmental
Quality (TCEQ) in accordance with STPNOC's TPDES general permit (STPNOC
2009). With these controls, the NRC staff concludes that impacts to
surface water quality from installation of the CFRWs would not be
significant.
Terrestrial Resources Impacts
As stated above, the proposed action would be a small portion of
the 12,220-ac STP site, and land disturbance for the CFRWs would occur
in previously disturbed areas on the STP site. Therefore, the staff
concludes there would be no impacts to terrestrial species or their
habitat associated with the proposed action.
Aquatic Resources Impacts
Impacts to aquatic resources from the proposed action would occur
from erosion and sedimentation associated with site stormwater
management. As stated above, as part of its SWPPP, STPNOC would employ
BMPs to minimize impacts from stormwater runoff to ditches and
wetlands. STPNOC plans to implement new detention ponds and drainage
capacity to accommodate surface water runoff in areas disturbed by site
preparation and construction activities (STPNOC 2009). Impacts from any
stormwater runoff reaching ditches and wetlands would be minimal and
temporary. As such, the staff concludes that impacts to aquatic
resources from installation of the CFRWs would not be significant.
Threatened and Endangered Species Impacts
Potential impacts to threatened and endangered species from the
proposed action result from land disturbances to terrestrial species.
Two species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended, that occur on or in the vicinity
(within 10 miles) of the STP site are the Federally endangered Northern
Aplomado falcon (Falco femoralis septentrionalis) and the Federally
threatened American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). The
Federally endangered whooping crane (Grus americana), a species of
special concern to Texas resource agencies and environmental groups,
has not been observed on the STP site.
These birds may migrate through the area and fly over the STP site,
but are unlikely to use the inland habitats found onsite. Because no
impacts are expected to occur for terrestrial species or their habitat,
the proposed action would have no impacts on the Northern Aplomado
falcon, the American alligator, or their habitats. The staff concludes
there would be no effects on federally threatened or endangered species
as a result of the proposed action.
Cultural and Historic Resources Impacts
According to the environmental report contained in STPNOC's COL
application for STP Units 3 and 4, there are no cultural and historic
resources at the STP site (STPNOC 2009). In support of its COLs
application, STPNOC consulted with the Texas Historical Commission and
received concurrence on its findings in January 2007 (STPNOC 2006,
2009). The NRC's independent review of cultural resources in support of
the environmental review for STPNOC's COLs application also did not
identify any cultural and historical resources that would be impacted
by construction and operation of proposed STP Units 3 and 4 (NRC
2010b). The area where the CFRWs would be installed was previously
disturbed during construction of STP Units 1 and 2, and any resources
that may have existed prior to construction of Units 1 and 2 would have
been destroyed during land clearing and construction activities (STPNOC
2010). Therefore, the staff concludes that no environmental impacts to
cultural and historic resources are expected from installation of the
CFRWs. STPNOC has procedures in place to protect undiscovered historic
or archaeological resources if discovered during site preparation and
construction activities, and such procedures would apply to the
proposed action (STPNOC 2008).
Air Quality Impacts
Installation of the CFRWs would result in temporary impacts on
local air quality from vehicle and construction equipment emissions,
and fugitive dust caused by earth-moving activities. As stated in the
ER for the COL application, to minimize impacts to air quality, STPNOC
would implement mitigation measures to minimize fugitive dust and
vehicle and equipment emissions, including water suppression, covering
truck loads and debris stockpiles, use of soil adhesives to stabilize
loose dirt surfaces, minimizing material handling, limiting vehicle
speed, and visual inspection of emission control equipment (STPNOC
2009). Construction equipment would be serviced regularly and operated
in accordance with local, State, and Federal emission requirements
(STPNOC 2009). Emissions from activities associated with installation
of the CFRWs would vary based on the level and duration of the specific
activity, but the overall impact on air quality is expected to be
temporary and limited in magnitude. The staff concludes that the
proposed action would not significantly contribute to air quality
impacts at the STP site.
Nonradiological Health Impacts
Nonradiological health impacts to the public and workers from the
proposed action would include exposure to fugitive dust, and vehicle
and construction equipment exhaust, occupational injuries, and noise;
as well as the transport of materials and personnel to and from the STP
site. Adherence to Federal and State regulations regarding air quality,
construction worker health, and noise would minimize nonradiological
health impacts. Mitigation measures, such as operational controls and
practices, worker training, use of personal protective equipment, and
fugitive dust and exhaust emissions control measures, would further
reduce impacts from the proposed action. Based on the number of
shipments of building materials and the number of workers that would be
transported to the STP site for site preparation and construction
activities (STPNOC 2009), the staff concludes that nonradiological
health impacts from transportation associated with installing the CFRWs
would be minimal. STPNOC has estimated that 75 workers would be needed
to install the CFRWs (STPNOC 2010). This would be a small fraction of
the 2,400 workers needed during peak preconstruction activities.
Accordingly, the staff concludes that nonradiological health impacts
from the proposed action would not be significant.
Nonradioactive Waste Impacts
Nonradioactive waste impacts from the proposed action include
impacts to land, water, and air from storage of excavated material,
runoff to ditches and wetlands, and emissions from vehicles and
construction equipment. Excavated materials would be stored onsite in
borrow or spoil areas not to exceed 240 ac for the entire STP Units 3
and 4 project (STPNOC 2009). Surface water runoff from development
activities would be controlled by implementation of a SWPPP (STPNOC
2010). Regulated practices for managing air emissions from construction
equipment and temporary stationary sources, BMPs for controlling
fugitive dust, and vehicle inspection and traffic management plans,
would minimize impacts to air. With the above controls
[[Page 67787]]
in place, the staff concludes that impacts of nonradioactive waste from
the proposed action would not be significant.
Socioeconomic Impacts and Environmental Justice
Potential socioeconomic impacts due to the proposed action include
physical impacts such as transportation, aesthetics, and air quality,
and social impacts including demographics, economy, infrastructure, and
community services. In its exemption request (STPNOC 2010), STPNOC
stated that 75 workers would be needed to install the CFRWs. The peak
number of workers required for preconstruction activities at the STP
site would be 2,400 (STPNOC 2009). The proposed action would occur
concurrently with other preconstruction activities, and therefore would
not significantly affect the size of the STP Units 3 and 4 labor force.
Given the small number of workers involved in installation of the
CFRWs, the staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not have
measurable socioeconomic impacts.
With regard to environmental justice, due to the lack of
significant environmental impacts resulting from the proposed action,
the staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not have
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority and low-income
populations in the vicinity of the STP site.
Summary
Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that granting the
proposed exemption that would permit installation of the CFRWs prior to
the issuance of COLs would not result in significant changes in
nonradiological impacts to land use, surface and groundwater resources,
terrestrial and aquatic resources, threatened and endangered species,
socioeconomic factors and environmental justice, cultural and historic
resources, air quality, nonradiological human health, and
nonradioactive waste.
Radiological Impacts
Radiological Health Impacts
Sources of radiation exposure from existing STP Units 1 and 2 for
construction workers include exposure from direct radiation and liquid
and gaseous radiological effluents (STPNOC 2009). In support of the
environmental review for the COL application, NRC staff estimated the
annual direct dose to a construction worker would be approximately 10
millirem (mrem), assuming 2,080 hours worked at the STP site per year
(NRC 2010c). The maximum radiological dose to construction workers from
gaseous and liquid pathways combined would be approximately 9 mrem.
Therefore, the estimated annual dose to construction workers would be
approximately 19 mrem based on an occupancy of 2,080 hours per year
(STPNOC 2009), which is less than the 100 mrem annual dose limit to an
individual member of public found in 10 CFR 20.1301. As such, the staff
concludes that radiological impacts to construction workers as a result
of the proposed action would be minimal. Accordingly, the staff
concludes that there would be no significant radiological health
impacts associated with the proposed exemption.
Summary
Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that granting the
proposed exemption that would permit installation of the CFRWs prior to
the issuance of COLs would not result in a significant increase in
occupational radiation exposure. The staff concludes that there would
be no significant radiological health impacts associated with the
proposed exemption.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered
denial of the proposed exemption (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
If NRC were to deny the exemption request, STPNOC would not be allowed
to install the CFRWs before the COLs are issued, and would need to wait
until a decision is made on its COL application before installing the
CFRWs. Denial of the exemption request would avoid the environmental
impacts discussed in this EA, unless NRC grants the COLs, in which case
the impacts would be incurred but they would be delayed until issuance
of the COLs.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC staff consulted with a number of Federal, State, regional,
Tribal, and local organizations regarding the environmental impacts of
granting the COLs for proposed STP Units 3 and 4, which includes the
environmental impacts of installation of CFRWs and other construction
activities. A complete list of organizations contacted can be found in
Appendix B of the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for COLs
for STP Units 3 and 4 (NRC 2010c). A partial list of Federal and State
agencies contacted includes: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(Region 6 and headquarters); National Marine Fisheries Service; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; Texas Commission on Environmental Quality;
Texas Historical Commission; Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; and
Texas State Historic Preservation Office. Comments from these agencies
regarding the overall COLs action were incorporated into the DEIS, and
if they were applicable to construction activities similar to
installation of the CFRWs, they have been included in this EA.
Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA for the proposed action. On the
basis of this EA, the NRC staff has determined that there would be no
significant environmental impacts associated with granting the
exemption, and an environmental impact statement need not be prepared.
Additional Information
STPNOC's exemption request is available electronically at the NRC's
Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS accession number for the
exemption request is ML100880055. The ADAMS accession number for the EA
is ML101580541. The ADAMS accession number for the DEIS for STP Units 3
and 4 (NUREG-1937, Vols. 1 and 2) is ML100700576. If you do not have
access to ADAMS or have problems accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff at 1-800-
397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or via e-mail to [email protected].
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of October, 2010.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Scott Flanders,
Division Director, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews, Office
of New Reactors.
References
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2006. Letter from S.
Dannhardt, STPNOC, to B. Martin, Texas Historical Commission, dated
December 12, 2006, ``Subject: South Texas Projects Units 3 and 4.''
ADAMS Accession No. ML092100145.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2008. Letter from M.
McBurnett, STPNOC, to NRC, dated June 9, 2008, ``Cultural or
Historical Artifact Discovery During Construction.'' ADAMS Accession
No. ML081640213.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2009. South Texas Project
Units 3 and 4 Combined License Application, Part 3, Environmental
Report. Revision 3, Bay
[[Page 67788]]
City, Texas. ADAMS Accession No. ML092931600.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2010a. Letter from M.
McBurnett, STPNOC, to NRC, dated March 23, 2010, ``Request for
Exemption to Authorize Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining
Walls.'' ADAMS Accession No. ML100880055.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2010b. Letter from Scott
Head, STPNOC, to NRC, dated July 21, 2010, ``Revised Request for
Exemption to Authorize Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining
Walls.'' ADAMS Accession No. ML102070274.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2000. Environmental
Standard Review Plan--Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for
Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG-1555, Washington, DC Includes 2007
updates.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010a. Letter from M.
Johnson, NRC, to M. McBurnett, STPNOC, dated January 8, 2010,
``South Texas Project Nuclear Power Plant Units 3 and 4 Request for
a Limited Work Authorization for Installation of Crane Foundation
Retaining Walls.'' ADAMS Accession No. ML093350744.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010b. Letter from R.
Whited, NRC, to M. Wolfe, Texas Historical Commission, dated March
19, 2010, ``Section 106 Consultation and Notification of the
Issuance of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the South
Texas Projects, Units 3 and 4, Combined License Application Review.
ADAMS Accession No. ML100490740.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010c. Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for South Texas
Project Electric Generating Station, Units 3 and 4. NUREG-1937, Vol.
1 and 2, Washington, DC Accession No. ML100700576.
[FR Doc. 2010-27764 Filed 11-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P