Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Issuance of Technical Specification Amendment for the Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 License DPR-007, Humboldt, CA, 37961-37962 [E6-10354]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 127 / Monday, July 3, 2006 / Notices
High-Level Radioactive Wastes in
Geologic Repositories.’’
3. The form number if applicable: Not
applicable.
4. How often the collection is
required: The information need only be
submitted one time.
5. Who will be required or asked to
report: State or Indian Tribes, or their
representatives, requesting consultation
with the NRC staff regarding review of
a potential high-level radioactive waste
geologic repository site, or wishing to
participate in a license application
review for a potential geologic
repository (other than a potential
geologic repository site at Yucca
Mountain, Nevada, currently under
investigation by the U.S. Department of
Energy, which is now regulated under
10 CFR part 63).
6. An estimate of the number of
annual responses: 1; however none are
expected in the next three years.
7. The number of annual respondents:
1; however none are expected in the
next three years.
8. An estimate of the total number of
hours needed annually to complete the
requirement or request: 1; however,
none are expected in the next three
years.
9. An indication of whether section
3507(d), Public Law 104–13 applies: Not
applicable.
10. Abstract: Part 60 requires States
and Indian Tribes to submit certain
information to the NRC if they request
consultation with the NRC staff
concerning the review of a potential
repository site, or wish to participate in
a license application review for a
potential repository (other than the
Yucca Mountain, Nevada site proposed
by the U.S. Department of Energy).
Representatives of States or Indian
Tribes must submit a statement of their
authority to act in such a representative
capacity. The information submitted by
the States and Indian Tribes is used by
the Director of the Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards as a
basis for decisions about the
commitment of NRC staff resources to
the consultation and participation
efforts. As provided in § 60.1, the
regulations in 10 CFR. Part 60 no longer
apply to the licensing of a geologic
repository at Yucca Mountain. All of the
information collection requirements
pertaining to Yucca Mountain were
included in 10 CFR part 63, and were
approved by the Office of Management
and Budget under control number 3150–
0199. The Yucca Mountain site is
regulated under 10 CFR part 63 (66 FR
55792, November 2, 2001).
A copy of the final supporting
statement may be viewed free of charge
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:12 Jun 30, 2006
Jkt 208001
at the NRC Public Document Room, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Room O–1 F21, Rockville, MD
20852. OMB clearance requests are
available at the NRC worldwide Web
site: https://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/
doc-comment/omb/. The
document will be available on the NRC
home page site for 60 days after the
signature date of this notice.
Comments and questions should be
directed to the OMB reviewer listed
below by August 2, 2006. Comments
received after this date will be
considered if it is practical to do so, but
assurance of consideration cannot be
given to comments received after this
date.
John A. Asalone, Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs (3150–0127),
NEOB–10202, Office of Management
and Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
Comments can also be e-mailed to
John_A._Asalone@omb.eop.gov or
submitted by telephone at (202) 395–
4650.
The NRC Clearance Officer is Brenda
Jo. Shelton, 301–415–7233.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day
of June, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brenda Jo. Shelton,
NRC Clearance Officer, Office of Information
Services.
[FR Doc. E6–10350 Filed 6–30–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–133]
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
Related to Issuance of Technical
Specification Amendment for the
Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3
License DPR–007, Humboldt, CA
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact.
AGENCY:
John
Hickman, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental
Protection, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop:
T7E18, Washington, DC 20555–00001.
Telephone: (301) 415–3017; e-mail:
jbh@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) staff is considering a
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
37961
request dated January 19, 2006, by the
Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PGE
or the Licensee), to approve an
amendment to Facility Operating
License No. DPR–7 that would revise
Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.2 to
correct an editorial error, and TS 5.2.2
to allow leaving the Unit 3 control room
temporarily unmanned during
emergency conditions requiring
personnel to evacuate occupied
buildings for their safety.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP)
was permanently shut down in July
1976, and until recently was in safe
storage condition (SAFSTOR).
SAFSTOR is defined as a method of
decommissioning in which the nuclear
facility is placed and maintained in safe
condition for an extended period of time
to permit radioactive material to decay
to levels that ease subsequent
decontamination and decommissioning
of the facility. A Decommissioning Plan
was approved in July 1988. Subsequent
to the 1996 decommissioning rule, the
licensee converted its decommissioning
plan into its Defueled Safety Analysis
Report which is updated every two
years. A Post Shutdown
Decommissioning Activities Report was
issued by the licensee in February 1998.
The licensee is now engaged in some
incremental decommissioning activities.
In December 2003, PG&E formally
submitted a license application to the
NRC for approval of a dry-cask
Independent Spent Fuel Storage
Installation (ISFSI) at the Humboldt Bay
site. A license and safety evaluation
report for the Humboldt Bay ISFSI were
issued on November 17, 2005. PG&E
should begin active decommissioning of
the facility in 2007.
On June 14, 2005, a magnitude 7.2
earthquake occurred 97 miles WNW of
the Humboldt Bay site and was felt
onsite. Subsequently a tsunami warning
was issued for an area that included the
plant site. In accordance with plant
emergency procedures, site personnel
evacuated the facility to the high ground
evacuation site within the owner
controlled area of the site. Since TS
5.2.2.c requires continuous staffing of
the Unit 3 control room, or alternatively
of the Units 1 and 2 control station, this
necessitated that the licensee invoke the
provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(x) for
noncompliance with the TS. Based on
this experience, and that the site will
continue to be subject to potential
earthquakes and tsunamis, the licensee
requested the change to the TS to allow
temporarily not manning the Unit 3
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
37962
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 127 / Monday, July 3, 2006 / Notices
control room, or the Units 1 or 2 control
station, when necessary to protect
worker health and safety.
This Environmental Assessment (EA)
has been developed in accordance with
the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21.
Proposed Action
The change proposed by this LAR will
modify TS 3.1.2, Limiting Condition for
Operation (LCO) 3.1.2, Condition A to
replace the word ‘‘restriction’’ with the
word ‘‘weight’’ so that action is required
if the load weight, rather than the load
restriction, is not within the limit. The
change will also modify TS 5.2.2.c to
allow the Unit 3 control room, and the
associated control station in Units 1 and
2, to be temporarily unmanned in an
emergency when personnel are required
to evacuate occupied buildings for their
health and safety. The proposed action
is in accordance with the licensee’s
application dated January 19, 2006,
requesting approval.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Need for Proposed Action
The proposed change to TS 3.1.2 will
clarify the LCO and is needed to ensure
that the appropriate limit is maintained.
The proposed change to TS 5.2.2.c to
allow the Unit 3 control room, and the
associated control station in Units 1 and
2, to be temporarily unmanned in an
emergency requiring evacuation is
needed to protect personnel health and
safety.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the proposed amendments to the
Technical Specifications and concludes
the changes would have no significant
impacts to the environment.
The NRC evaluated the safety impacts
of the proposed changes and determined
that the changes proposed by this
license amendment request, to clarify an
existing requirement and allow the
licensee evacuate the control room in an
emergency that requires site evacuation
for the protection of site staff health and
safety, will better ensure that a safety
limit is maintained and will not hinder
the licensee’s response to an emergency.
Allowing the control room operators
to evacuate the control room during an
emergency will not create a situation
where response will be delayed or less
effective due to the absence of the
monitoring and coordination provided
by the control room operators, because
the plant operators who perform the
recovery actions will also be evacuated
in a life threatening emergency, thereby
removing the staff that the control room
operators would direct in the
emergency. Additionally, the possible
VerDate Aug<31>2005
17:12 Jun 30, 2006
Jkt 208001
loss of the control room operator in an
emergency would further delay the site
recovery when the emergency condition
has passed. Therefore, for the hazardous
conditions considered, the proposed
action would best insure that the
personnel required for recovery are
available when the recovery can be
performed. Based on the above, the
proposed action would not increase the
probability or consequences of
accidents, would not change the types
of effluents that may be released offsite,
and would not increase occupation or
public radiation exposure.
Since the amendment only affects
actions in the industrial portion of the
facility, the proposed action does not
have a potential to affect any historic
sites.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The alternative to the proposed action
would be to deny the request. Denial of
this amendment request would have the
same environmental impact as the
proposed action.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
This EA was prepared by John B.
Hickman, Project Manager,
Decommissioning Directorate, Division
of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection (DWMEP).
NRC staff determined that the proposed
action is not a major decommissioning
activity and will not affect listed or
proposed endangered species, nor
critical habitat. Therefore, no further
consultation is required under Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act.
Likewise, NRC staff determined that the
proposed action is not the type of
activity that has the potential to cause
previously unconsidered effects on
historic properties, as consultation for
site decommissioning has been
conducted previously. There are no
additional impacts to historic properties
associated with the disposal method
and location for demolition debris.
Therefore, no consultation is required
under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. The NRC
provided a draft of its EA to the
Radiologic Health Branch of the
California State Department of Health
Services. The state official had no
comments.
III. 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.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
IV. Further Information
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated January 19, 2006. (ADAMS
Accession No. ML060310499) The NRC
Public Documents Room is located at
NRC Headquarters in Rockville, MD,
and can be contacted at (800) 397–4209.
Documents may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland.
Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System’s (ADAMS) Public
Library component on the NRC Web
site, https://www.nrc.gov (the Public
Electronic Reading Room). 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 at pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd
day of June, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning
Directorate, Division of Waste Management
and Environmental Protection, Office of
Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6–10354 Filed 6–30–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 40–8905]
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment for Rio Algom Mining LLC,
Ambrosia Lake, NM
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael G. Raddatz, Project Manager,
Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of
Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office
of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC, 20555.
Telephone: (301) 415–6334; fax number:
(301) 415–5955; e-mail: mgr@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) proposes to issue a license
amendment to Source Materials License
No. SUA–1473 held by Rio Algom
E:\FR\FM\03JYN1.SGM
03JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 127 (Monday, July 3, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37961-37962]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-10354]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-133]
Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
Related to Issuance of Technical Specification Amendment for the
Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 License DPR-007, Humboldt, CA
AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Hickman, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop:
T7E18, Washington, DC 20555-00001. Telephone: (301) 415-3017; e-mail:
jbh@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering a
request dated January 19, 2006, by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(PGE or the Licensee), to approve an amendment to Facility Operating
License No. DPR-7 that would revise Technical Specification (TS) 3.1.2
to correct an editorial error, and TS 5.2.2 to allow leaving the Unit 3
control room temporarily unmanned during emergency conditions requiring
personnel to evacuate occupied buildings for their safety.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) was permanently shut down in July
1976, and until recently was in safe storage condition (SAFSTOR).
SAFSTOR is defined as a method of decommissioning in which the nuclear
facility is placed and maintained in safe condition for an extended
period of time to permit radioactive material to decay to levels that
ease subsequent decontamination and decommissioning of the facility. A
Decommissioning Plan was approved in July 1988. Subsequent to the 1996
decommissioning rule, the licensee converted its decommissioning plan
into its Defueled Safety Analysis Report which is updated every two
years. A Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report was issued by
the licensee in February 1998. The licensee is now engaged in some
incremental decommissioning activities. In December 2003, PG&E formally
submitted a license application to the NRC for approval of a dry-cask
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) at the Humboldt Bay
site. A license and safety evaluation report for the Humboldt Bay ISFSI
were issued on November 17, 2005. PG&E should begin active
decommissioning of the facility in 2007.
On June 14, 2005, a magnitude 7.2 earthquake occurred 97 miles WNW
of the Humboldt Bay site and was felt onsite. Subsequently a tsunami
warning was issued for an area that included the plant site. In
accordance with plant emergency procedures, site personnel evacuated
the facility to the high ground evacuation site within the owner
controlled area of the site. Since TS 5.2.2.c requires continuous
staffing of the Unit 3 control room, or alternatively of the Units 1
and 2 control station, this necessitated that the licensee invoke the
provisions of 10 CFR 50.54(x) for noncompliance with the TS. Based on
this experience, and that the site will continue to be subject to
potential earthquakes and tsunamis, the licensee requested the change
to the TS to allow temporarily not manning the Unit 3
[[Page 37962]]
control room, or the Units 1 or 2 control station, when necessary to
protect worker health and safety.
This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been developed in accordance
with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21.
Proposed Action
The change proposed by this LAR will modify TS 3.1.2, Limiting
Condition for Operation (LCO) 3.1.2, Condition A to replace the word
``restriction'' with the word ``weight'' so that action is required if
the load weight, rather than the load restriction, is not within the
limit. The change will also modify TS 5.2.2.c to allow the Unit 3
control room, and the associated control station in Units 1 and 2, to
be temporarily unmanned in an emergency when personnel are required to
evacuate occupied buildings for their health and safety. The proposed
action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated January
19, 2006, requesting approval.
Need for Proposed Action
The proposed change to TS 3.1.2 will clarify the LCO and is needed
to ensure that the appropriate limit is maintained. The proposed change
to TS 5.2.2.c to allow the Unit 3 control room, and the associated
control station in Units 1 and 2, to be temporarily unmanned in an
emergency requiring evacuation is needed to protect personnel health
and safety.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed amendments to
the Technical Specifications and concludes the changes would have no
significant impacts to the environment.
The NRC evaluated the safety impacts of the proposed changes and
determined that the changes proposed by this license amendment request,
to clarify an existing requirement and allow the licensee evacuate the
control room in an emergency that requires site evacuation for the
protection of site staff health and safety, will better ensure that a
safety limit is maintained and will not hinder the licensee's response
to an emergency.
Allowing the control room operators to evacuate the control room
during an emergency will not create a situation where response will be
delayed or less effective due to the absence of the monitoring and
coordination provided by the control room operators, because the plant
operators who perform the recovery actions will also be evacuated in a
life threatening emergency, thereby removing the staff that the control
room operators would direct in the emergency. Additionally, the
possible loss of the control room operator in an emergency would
further delay the site recovery when the emergency condition has
passed. Therefore, for the hazardous conditions considered, the
proposed action would best insure that the personnel required for
recovery are available when the recovery can be performed. Based on the
above, the proposed action would not increase the probability or
consequences of accidents, would not change the types of effluents that
may be released offsite, and would not increase occupation or public
radiation exposure.
Since the amendment only affects actions in the industrial portion
of the facility, the proposed action does not have a potential to
affect any historic sites.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the
request. Denial of this amendment request would have the same
environmental impact as the proposed action.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
This EA was prepared by John B. Hickman, Project Manager,
Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste Management and
Environmental Protection (DWMEP). NRC staff determined that the
proposed action is not a major decommissioning activity and will not
affect listed or proposed endangered species, nor critical habitat.
Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act. Likewise, NRC staff determined that the
proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to
cause previously unconsidered effects on historic properties, as
consultation for site decommissioning has been conducted previously.
There are no additional impacts to historic properties associated with
the disposal method and location for demolition debris. Therefore, no
consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act. The NRC provided a draft of its EA to the Radiologic
Health Branch of the California State Department of Health Services.
The state official had no comments.
III. 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.
IV. Further Information
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated January 19, 2006. (ADAMS Accession No.
ML060310499) The NRC Public Documents Room is located at NRC
Headquarters in Rockville, MD, and can be contacted at (800) 397-4209.
Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records
will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System's (ADAMS) Public Library component on the NRC Web
site, https://www.nrc.gov (the Public Electronic Reading Room). 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 at
pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 22nd day of June, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning Directorate, Division of Waste
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. E6-10354 Filed 6-30-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
