Daily Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices of the Federal Government
* The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from § 50.46 of Title 10 of the The proposed action would add Optimized ZIRLO The proposed action is needed because the regulation in 10 CFR 50.46 contains acceptance criteria for the ECCS for reactors that have fuel rods fabricated either with Zircaloy or ZIRLO
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption from § 50.46 of Title 10 of the
The proposed action would add Optimized ZIRLO
The proposed action is needed because the regulation in 10 CFR 50.46 contains acceptance criteria for the ECCS for reactors that have fuel rods fabricated either with Zircaloy or ZIRLO
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that the exemption does not present undue risk to public health and safety, and is consistent with common defense and security.
The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the license amendment that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the license amendment to the regulation.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents
With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed action does not have any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with such proposed action. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the “no-action” alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the NRC's 1984 “Final Environmental Statement Related to operation of Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit 3,” and NUREG-1437, “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,” Supplement 22 regarding Millstone Power Station, Units 2 and 3.
In accordance with its stated policy, on July 30, 2012, the NRC staff consulted with the Connecticut State official, Michael Firsick of the Department of Environmental Protection, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee's application dated November 17, 2011.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.