Southern California Edison Company and San Diego Gas and Electric Company, the City of Riverside, California and the City of Anaheim, California, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 19553-19554 [06-3594]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2006 / Notices
right under the Act to be made a party
to the proceeding; (3) the nature and
extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s
property, financial, or other interest in
the proceeding; and (4) the possible
effect of any decision or order which
may be entered in the proceeding on the
requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The
petition must also identify the specific
contentions which the petitioner/
requestor seeks to have litigated at the
proceeding.
Each contention must consist of a
specific statement of the issue of law or
fact to be raised or controverted. In
addition, the petitioner/requestor shall
provide a brief explanation of the bases
for the contention and a concise
statement of the alleged facts or expert
opinion which support the contention
and on which the petitioner intends to
rely in proving the contention at the
hearing. The petitioner/requestor must
also provide references to those specific
sources and documents of which the
petitioner is aware and on which the
petitioner intends to rely to establish
those facts or expert opinion. The
petition must include sufficient
information to show that a genuine
dispute exists with the applicant on a
material issue of law or fact.
Contentions shall be limited to matters
within the scope of the amendments
under consideration. The contention
must be one which, if proven, would
entitle the petitioner to relief. A
petitioner/requestor who fails to satisfy
these requirements with respect to at
least one contention will not be
permitted to participate as a party.
Those permitted to intervene become
parties to the proceeding, subject to any
limitations in the order granting leave to
intervene, and have the opportunity to
participate fully in the conduct of the
hearing.
If a hearing is requested, the
Commission will make a final
determination on the issue of no
significant hazards consideration. The
final determination will serve to decide
when the hearing is held. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves no significant hazards
consideration, the Commission may
issue the amendments and make them
immediately effective, notwithstanding
the request for a hearing. Any hearing
held would take place after issuance of
the amendments. If the final
determination is that the amendment
request involves a significant hazards
consideration, any hearing held would
take place before the issuance of any
amendments.
Nontimely requests and/or petitions
and contentions will not be entertained
absent a determination by the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Apr 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
Commission or the presiding officer of
the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board
that the petition, request and/or the
contentions should be granted based on
a balancing of the factors specified in 10
CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii).
A request for a hearing or a petition
for leave to intervene must be filed by:
(1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express
mail, and expedited delivery services:
Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor,
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852,
Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
hearingdocket@nrc.gov; or (4) facsimile
transmission addressed to the Office of
the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC,
Attention: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101,
verification number is (301) 415–1966.
A copy of the request for hearing and
petition for leave to intervene should
also be sent to the Office of the General
Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, and it is requested that copies be
transmitted either by means of facsimile
transmission to 301–415–3725 or by email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A copy
of the request for hearing or petition for
leave to intervene should also be sent to
Richard F. Locke, Esq., Pacific Gas and
Electric Company, P.O. Box 7442, San
Francisco, California 94120, the attorney
for the licensee.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application for
amendments dated January 19, 2006,
which is available for public inspection
at the Commission’s PDR, located at
One White Flint North, File Public Area
O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible from
the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System’s (ADAMS) Public
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet
at the NRC Web site, https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Persons who do not have access to
ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in
ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–
397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail
to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day
of February 2006.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
19553
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Alan B. Wang,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Licensing Project Management,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–5595 Filed 4–13–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–361 and 50–362]
Southern California Edison Company
and San Diego Gas and Electric
Company, the City of Riverside,
California and the City of Anaheim,
California, San Onofre Nuclear
Generating Station, Units 2 and 3;
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR) Part 50, Appendix G for Facility
Operating License No. NPF–10 and
NPF–15, issued to Southern California
Edison (the licensee), for operation of
the San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station, Units 2 and 3 (SONGS 2 and 3),
located in San Diego County, California.
Therefore, as provided by 10 CFR 51.21
and 51.33, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
By letter dated January 28, 2005, the
licensee submitted a license amendment
request where, among other changes, the
licensee requested the use of an
alternate methodology for calculating
the stress intensity factor KIm due to
internal pressure loading. As required
by the safety evaluation on topical
report Combustion Engineering (CE)
Topical Report NPSD–683–A, Revision
6, dated March 16, 2001, the licensee,
by its supplement dated January 12,
2006, included a request for an
exemption from the requirements of 10
CFR Part 50, Appendix G for pressure
temperature (P–T) limits since the
alternate methodology applies the CE
Nuclear Steam Supply System method
for calculating KIm stress intensity
values.
The proposed action would exempt
the licensee from certain requirements
of Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 to
allow the application of the
methodology in CE NPSD–683–A,
Revision 6, ‘‘The Development of a RCS
[Reactor Coolant System] Pressure and
Temperature Limits Report for the
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
19554
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 72 / Friday, April 14, 2006 / Notices
The Need for the Proposed Action
In the associated exemption, the staff
has determined that, pursuant to 10 CFR
50.12(a)(2)(ii), the application of the
regulation in the particular
circumstances is not necessary to
achieve the underlying purpose of the
rule, based on the alternative
methodology proposed in the licensee’s
amendment request. The proposed
action would revise the currentlyapproved methodology for P–T limit
calculations to incorporate the
methodology approved for use in CE
NPSD–683–A, Revision 6. The topical
report allows the use of an alternate
methodology to calculate the flaw stress
intensity factors due to internal pressure
loadings (KIm). The exemption is needed
because the methodology in CE NPSD–
683–A, Revision 6, could not be shown
to be conservative with respect to the
methodology for the determination of
KIm provided in Editions and Addenda
of ASME Code, Section XI, Appendix G,
through the 1995 Edition and 1996
Addenda (the latest Edition and
Addenda of the ASME Code which had
been incorporated into 10 CFR 50.55a at
the time of the staff’s review of CE
NPSD–683–A, Revision 6). Therefore,
along with the supplement dated
January 12, 2006, the licensee submitted
an exemption request, consistent with
the requirements of 10 CFR 50.60, to
apply the KIm calculational
methodology of CE NPSD–683–A,
Revision 6, as part of the SONGS 2 and
3 pressure temperature limit report
(PTLR) methodology.
that may be released off site, and there
is no significant increase in
occupational or public radiation
exposure. Therefore, there are no
significant radiological environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
With regard to potential
nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect
any historic sites. It does not affect
nonradiological plant effluents and has
no other environmental impact.
Therefore, there are no significant
nonradiological environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
electronically from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Public Electronic
Reading Room on the Internet at the
NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who
do not have access to ADAMS or who
encounter problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, should
contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by
telephone at 1–800–397–4209 or 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
action, the staff considered denial of the
proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’
alternative). Denial of the application
would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The
environmental impacts of the proposed
action and the alternative action are
similar.
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the proposed action and concludes
that the exemption described above
would provide an adequate margin of
safety against brittle failure of the
reactor pressure vessel at SONGS 2 and
3. The details of the staff’s safety
evaluation will be provided in the
exemption to Appendix G, which will
allow the use of the methodology in
Topical Report CE NPSD–683–A,
Revision 6, to calculate the flaw stress
intensity factors due to internal pressure
loadings (KIm), that will be issued in a
future letter to the licensee.
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, no changes
are being made in the types of effluents
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental
assessment, the NRC concludes that the
proposed action will not have a
significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the
NRC has determined not to prepare an
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s
exemption letter dated January 28, 2005,
as supplemented by letter dated January
12, 2006. Documents may be examined,
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s
Public Document Room (PDR), located
at One White Flint North, Public File
Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly
available records will be accessible
wwhite on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Removal of P–T Limits and LTOP [LowTemperature Overpressure Protection]
Setpoints from the Technical
Specifications,’’ for the calculation of
flaw stress intensity factors due to
internal pressure loadings (KIm).
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:37 Apr 13, 2006
Jkt 208001
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of
any different resources than those
previously considered in the Final
Environmental Statement for the
SONGS 2 and 3 dated May 12, 1981.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On March 28, 2006, the staff
consulted with the California State
official, Steve Hsu of the Department of
Health Services, Radiologic Health
Branch, regarding the environmental
impact of the proposed action. The State
official had no comments.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day
of April 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
N. Kalyanam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06–3594 Filed 4–13–06; 8:45 am]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–293]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.;
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station; Notice
of Intent To Prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement and Conduct
Scoping Process
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Entergy) has submitted an application
for renewal of Facility Operating
License DPR–35 for an additional 20
years of operation at the Pilgrim Nuclear
Power Station (Pilgrim). Pilgrim is
located on the western shore of Cape
Cod in the Town of Plymouth,
Plymouth County, Massachusetts. It is
38 miles southeast of Boston,
Massachusetts, and 44 miles east of
Providence, Rhode Island.
The operating license for Pilgrim
expires on June 8, 2012. The application
for renewal was received on January 25,
2006, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 54.
A notice of receipt and availability of
the application, which included the
environmental report (ER), was
published in the Federal Register on
February 6, 2006 (71 FR 6101). A notice
of acceptance for docketing of the
application for renewal of the facility
operating license was published in the
Federal Register on March 27, 2006 (71
FR 15222). The purpose of this notice is
to inform the public that the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
will be preparing an environmental
impact statement (EIS) in support of the
review of the license renewal
application and to provide the public an
opportunity to participate in the
environmental scoping process, as
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 72 (Friday, April 14, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19553-19554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-3594]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-361 and 50-362]
Southern California Edison Company and San Diego Gas and Electric
Company, the City of Riverside, California and the City of Anaheim,
California, San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3;
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Appendix G for Facility Operating License
No. NPF-10 and NPF-15, issued to Southern California Edison (the
licensee), for operation of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station,
Units 2 and 3 (SONGS 2 and 3), located in San Diego County, California.
Therefore, as provided by 10 CFR 51.21 and 51.33, the NRC is issuing
this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
By letter dated January 28, 2005, the licensee submitted a license
amendment request where, among other changes, the licensee requested
the use of an alternate methodology for calculating the stress
intensity factor KIm due to internal pressure loading. As
required by the safety evaluation on topical report Combustion
Engineering (CE) Topical Report NPSD-683-A, Revision 6, dated March 16,
2001, the licensee, by its supplement dated January 12, 2006, included
a request for an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix G for pressure temperature (P-T) limits since the alternate
methodology applies the CE Nuclear Steam Supply System method for
calculating KIm stress intensity values.
The proposed action would exempt the licensee from certain
requirements of Appendix G to 10 CFR Part 50 to allow the application
of the methodology in CE NPSD-683-A, Revision 6, ``The Development of a
RCS [Reactor Coolant System] Pressure and Temperature Limits Report for
the
[[Page 19554]]
Removal of P-T Limits and LTOP [Low-Temperature Overpressure
Protection] Setpoints from the Technical Specifications,'' for the
calculation of flaw stress intensity factors due to internal pressure
loadings (KIm).
The Need for the Proposed Action
In the associated exemption, the staff has determined that,
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii), the application of the regulation
in the particular circumstances is not necessary to achieve the
underlying purpose of the rule, based on the alternative methodology
proposed in the licensee's amendment request. The proposed action would
revise the currently-approved methodology for P-T limit calculations to
incorporate the methodology approved for use in CE NPSD-683-A, Revision
6. The topical report allows the use of an alternate methodology to
calculate the flaw stress intensity factors due to internal pressure
loadings (KIm). The exemption is needed because the
methodology in CE NPSD-683-A, Revision 6, could not be shown to be
conservative with respect to the methodology for the determination of
KIm provided in Editions and Addenda of ASME Code, Section
XI, Appendix G, through the 1995 Edition and 1996 Addenda (the latest
Edition and Addenda of the ASME Code which had been incorporated into
10 CFR 50.55a at the time of the staff's review of CE NPSD-683-A,
Revision 6). Therefore, along with the supplement dated January 12,
2006, the licensee submitted an exemption request, consistent with the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.60, to apply the KIm calculational
methodology of CE NPSD-683-A, Revision 6, as part of the SONGS 2 and 3
pressure temperature limit report (PTLR) methodology.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that the exemption described above would provide an adequate
margin of safety against brittle failure of the reactor pressure vessel
at SONGS 2 and 3. The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be
provided in the exemption to Appendix G, which will allow the use of
the methodology in Topical Report CE NPSD-683-A, Revision 6, to
calculate the flaw stress intensity factors due to internal pressure
loadings (KIm), that will be issued in a future letter to
the licensee.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of
effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant
increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there
are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does
not affect nonradiological plant effluents and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant
nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
Denial of the application would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action
and the alternative action are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for
the SONGS 2 and 3 dated May 12, 1981.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
On March 28, 2006, the staff consulted with the California State
official, Steve Hsu of the Department of Health Services, Radiologic
Health Branch, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes
that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has determined
not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposed
action.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's exemption letter dated January 28, 2005, as supplemented by
letter dated January 12, 2006. Documents may be examined, and/or copied
for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first
floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at the NRC Web site, https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or by
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 7th day of April 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
N. Kalyanam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 06-3594 Filed 4-13-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
