Energy Northwest; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 52824-52826 [E6-14774]
Download as PDF
52824
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 173 / Thursday, September 7, 2006 / Notices
The
agenda for the meeting includes the
following topics:
• Status of NASA Planetary
Exploration Activities/Implementations.
• The COSPAR Assembly in Beijing.
• Special Regions Concept to Mars
Planetary Protection Requirements.
• Protection Requirements for
Humans on Mars and Lunar
Opportunities for Preliminary
Preparation.
• Preliminary Protection Future
Planning, Responsibilities, and
International Cooperation.
The meeting will be open to the
public up to the seating capacity of the
room. Findings and recommendations
developed by the Subcommittee during
its meeting will be submitted to the
Science Committee of the NAC.
It is imperative that the meeting be
held on these dates to accommodate the
scheduling priorities of the key
participants. Attendees will be
requested to sign a visitor’s register.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: August 30, 2006.
P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer,
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration.
[FR Doc. E6–14841 Filed 9–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–460; Nuclear Project No. 1
(WNP–1)]
Energy Northwest; Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is terminating
Construction Permit No. CPPR–134
issued to Washington Public Power
Supply System (permittee, now doing
business as Energy Northwest) for the
Nuclear Project No. 1 (WNP–1). The
facility is located at Energy Northwest’s
site on the Department of Energy’s
Hanford Reservation in Benton County,
Washington, approximately 8 miles
north of Richland, Washington.
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action is issuance of an
Order that would terminate
Construction Permit No. CPPR–134 for
the partially completed and previously
deferred WNP–1 facility. Because the
construction permit for Unit 4 (WNP–4)
was effectively subsumed in the Unit 1
construction permit on November 27,
1985, the proposed action would
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:26 Sep 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
terminate NRC oversight at the Unit 1
and Unit 4 site area. The proposed
action is in response to Energy
Northwest’s request dated August 9,
2005, supplemented by letter dated July
7, 2006.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to
allow the permitee to undertake other
activities (aside from the construction
and possible future operation of a
nuclear power plant) at the WNP–1 and
WNP–4 site area. For example, Energy
Northwest is investigating the possible
use of the WNP–1⁄4 site for an industrial
park. An application for an operating
license was filed with the NRC for
WNP–1; the Operating License
Proceeding was terminated by the
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on
July 26, 2000. The construction permit
for Unit 1 would have expired on June
1, 2011. Energy Northwest requested the
termination of the WNP–1 construction
permit because it has determined that it
will not complete construction of either
WNP–1 or WNP–4; it has terminated the
construction of the nuclear power plants
as well as the maintenance of layup
activities such that neither unit can be
operated as a utilization facility.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The WNP–1 and adjacent WNP–4
sites are located on a portion of the
Hanford Reservation in Washington
State that the permittee has leased from
U.S. Department of Energy. The
environmental impacts associated with
the construction of the facility have
been previously discussed and
evaluated in the Final Environmental
Statement (FES) prepared as part of the
NRC staff’s review of the construction
permit application, NUREG–75/012,
March 1975. Construction was
suspended on the partially-completed
WNP–1 Project in 1982.
The construction of WNP–1 was
approximately 65 percent complete;
therefore, most of the construction
impacts discussed in the FES have
already occurred. This action would
terminate the authorization to conduct
any of the remaining construction
activities described in the FES and
would also terminate NRC’s oversight
for activities at the site area.
Restoration of the site is being
conducted in accordance with
Washington State Energy Facility Site
Evaluation Council (EFSEC) Resolution
No. 302 (Resolution). This resolution
contains the requirements and schedule
for restoration of the WNP–1 and WNP–
4 sites, as agreed to by Energy
Northwest, Bonneville Power
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Administration, U.S. Department of
Energy, and the State of Washington.
This agreement, approved by the four
parties in December 2003, stipulated
restoration activities in two phases—
near term (within 18 to 24 months) and
final restoration (within approximately
26 years, or by the end of 2029). The
NRC staff assessed the scope of the
restoration activities addressed in the
Resolution and has determined that the
goals and objectives of such activities,
when carried out, would achieve an
environmentally stable and aesthetically
acceptable site. Energy Northwest has
stated that all near term activities have
been completed.
Near term restoration activities that
have been completed at the WNP–1 and
WNP–4 site area include: removal of
hazardous materials (such as asbestos,
mercury vapor lights, transformer
mineral oil or polychlorinated
biphenyls [PCBs], diesel fuel, lubricants,
and solvents); installation of secure
access doors or permanent sealing of
points of entry to the remaining
structures on the sites; relocation of
fencing and installation of new fencing
to minimize the land area and to reduce
unauthorized entry potential such that
security patrols are not required;
installation of ‘‘No Trespassing’’ signs;
elimination of fall hazards; fencing of
exterior substations and distribution
load centers to minimize the potential
for entry; and removal of temporary
buildings that are neither safe nor
feasible for reuse.
The Unit 1 Containment Building has
been cleaned to remove trash, debris,
overhead hazards, scaffolding, and
formwork. Under the Resolution, this
building will remain intact as
constructed—no further actions will be
needed for the Unit 1 containment at the
final restoration phase.
The Unit 4 Containment Building has
been cleaned to remove trash, debris,
overhead hazards, scaffolding, and
formwork. This building was filled with
compacted earth to elevation 479′ and a
6″ thick concrete floor was poured at
that level. (The ground elevation around
the containment and general services
buildings at WNP–1 and WNP–4 is
approximately 455′ above mean sea
level.) Openings in the Unit 4
Containment Building were either
sealed or fitted with anti-bird roosting
screens; building protrusions were
minimized or fitted with anti-bird
roosting screens. Provision was made
for water drainage. Under the
Resolution, this building will remain in
its existing condition—no further
actions will be needed for the Unit 4
containment at the final restoration
phase.
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 173 / Thursday, September 7, 2006 / Notices
The Unit 1 General Services Building
has had concrete roofs poured at
elevations 518′ and 543′. Under the
Resolution, this building will remain
intact as constructed. The upper levels
of the Unit 4 General Services Building
interior has been cleaned to remove
trash, debris, overhead hazards,
scaffolding, and formwork. The lower
areas of the Unit 4 General Services
Building, where no access is required,
will not be cleaned. The walls have
been demolished to the 501′ elevation.
Metal roofing with a (painted
polystyrene) coating has been installed
at elevations 501′ and 479′ to seal the
building. Under the Resolution, both
buildings will remain in their current
configuration—no further actions will
be needed for the Unit 1 or the Unit 4
General Services Building at the final
restoration phase.
The interior of the Unit 1 TurbineGenerator Building has been cleaned to
remove trash, debris, and overhead
hazards. This building will be
demolished and removed at the Final
Restoration phase. Under the
Resolution, the Unit 1 turbine pedestal
will remain after demolition and
removal of the building.
Construction of the WNP–4 TurbineGenerator Building was halted following
completion of the building shell
(structural steel, floor slabs, walls, roof,
exterior siding, etc.). These elements
were demolished in 1990 prior to the
restoration agreement with EFSEC. Only
the turbine pedestal and portions of the
ground floor slab remain. Under the
Resolution, the Unit 4 turbine pedestal
will remain intact as constructed—no
further actions will be needed for the
Unit 4 turbine pedestal at the final
restoration phase.
The Unit 1 and Unit 4 spray ponds
have had separate fences installed
around the ponds. The interiors of the
Unit 1 and Unit 4 Pump House
Buildings have been cleaned to remove
trash, debris, overhead hazards,
scaffolding, and formwork. Under the
Resolution, final restoration for these
structures will consist of removal of the
buildings and backfilling of the spray
ponds.
The Unit 1 and Unit 4 cooling towers
have had chain link fences with locked
gates installed to secure access to the
cooling tower stairwells. Anti-bird
screens have been added to minimize
access by birds. Under the Resolution,
final restoration activities for the Unit 1
and Unit 4 cooling towers will include
demolition of the existing structures to
grade and removal of the basin slabs.
During the final restoration phase, all
slabs and most structures (except for the
Containment Buildings, General
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:26 Sep 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
Services Buildings, and turbine
pedestals) will be removed. The landfill
will be closed and capped, the large
underground circulating water lines will
be backfilled, all roads and rail lines
will be removed and graded, and all
yard areas will be cleaned, contoured,
graded and seeded implementing best
management practices. After the final
restoration activities have been
completed, the structures remaining
permanently in place at the sites will be
limited to the Units 1 and 4
Containment Buildings, General
Services Buildings, and turbine
pedestals.
The permit issued by the Army Corps
of Engineers for the submerged river
water intake structure requires that if
Energy Northwest decides to abandon
the intake structure, Energy Northwest
must restore the area to a condition
satisfactory to the district engineer. At
this time, the river intake structure may
be a part of future plans for use of the
site and abandonment is not under
consideration.
The NRC staff conducted an audit of
the site area encompassing WNP–1 and
WNP–4 on April 24 and 25, 2006, to
determine whether posession of source,
byproduct or special nuclear material
was controlled as authorized, to
determine whether the site area is being
maintained in a safe and stable manner,
and to assess key environmental aspects
of the site. The staff observed selected
portions of the Containment Buildings,
General Services Buildings, spray
ponds, cooling towers, the Unit 1
Turbine-Generator Building, Pump
House Buildings, and other site
buildings. The staff also observed that
erosion controls were being maintained.
The staff assessed the effectiveness of
the measures already taken under the
near term phase of site restoration plan
and concluded that restoration activities
appear to meet the goals and objectives
of Washington State EFSEC Resolution
No. 302.
Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff
has concluded that the proposed action
would have no significant
environmental impact. The staff also
concluded that there is reasonable
assurance that the remaining site
restoration activities under the
Resolution will achieve an
environmentally stable and aesthetically
acceptable site for whatever non-nuclear
use may conform with local zoning laws
and Department of Energy
authorizations.
The site area cannot be used for the
utilization facility envisioned under
CPPR–134. No nuclear fuel was ever
received on site. The site area is in an
environmentally stable condition that
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
52825
poses no significant hazard to persons
onsite. The facility cannot be operated
in its present condition. Because this
proposed action would only terminate
the construction permit, it does not
involve any different impacts or involve
a significant change to those impacts
described and analyzed in the FES.
Consequently, an environmental impact
statement addressing the proposed
action is not required.
Because the proposed construction
permit termination Order is for a project
that was suspended 24 years ago, the
action is judged to be administrative in
nature and would have no significant
environmental impact. It does not
involve any different impacts as
described and analyzed in the Staff’s
FES and will not involve any impacts
beyond those already described and
analyzed in the FES. The proposed
action will terminate the NRC’s
involvement on the project.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The only alternative to the proposed
action would be to deny the request, i.e.,
the ‘‘no action’’ alternative. This
alternative would still result in the
conduct of the activities prescribed for
final restoration in the four-party
agreement dated December 3, 2003. This
alternative would necessitate continued
oversight by NRC of a project that has
ceased construction and has no
likelihood of completion; that will not
be operated as a utilization facility; that
has stable environmental conditions;
and that continues to be subject to
oversight by other regulatory agencies—
all with no significant environmental
benefit. The environmental impacts of
the proposed action and the ‘‘no action’’
alternative are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use
of resources not previously considered
in the FES for WNP–1.
Agencies and Persons Contacted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on August 31, 2006, the staff consulted
with the Washington State Official, Mr.
Richard Cowley, 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 this
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 this
action.
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
52826
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 173 / Thursday, September 7, 2006 / Notices
For further details with respect to this
action, see the licensee’s request for
construction permit termination dated
August 9, 2005, supplemented by letter
dated July 7, 2006. Documents may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
NRC’s Public Document Room, located
at One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records
will be accessible electronically from
the Agency wide Documents Access and
Management Systems (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–
397–4029 or 301–415–4737, or send an
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 31st day
of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brian J. Benney,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6–14774 Filed 9–6–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Nuclear
Waste; Meeting on Planning and
Procedures; Notice of Meeting
The Advisory Committee on Nuclear
Waste (ACNW) will hold a Planning and
Procedures meeting on September 18,
2006, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire
meeting will be open to public
attendance, with the exception of a
portion that may be closed pursuant to
5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(2) and (6) to discuss
organizational and personnel matters
that relate solely to internal personnel
rules and practices of ACNW, and
information the release of which would
constitute a clearly unwarranted
invasion of personal privacy.
The agenda for the subject meeting
shall be as follows:
rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with NOTICES
Monday, September 18, 2006—8:30
a.m.–9:30 a.m.
The Committee will discuss proposed
ACNW activities and related matters.
The purpose of this meeting is to gather
information, analyze relevant issues and
facts, and formulate proposed positions
and actions, as appropriate, for
deliberation by the full Committee.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:11 Sep 06, 2006
Jkt 208001
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official, Mr. Antonio F. Dias
(Telephone: 301/415–6805) between
8:15 a.m. and 5 p.m. (ET) five days prior
to the meeting, if possible, so that
appropriate arrangements can be made.
Electronic recordings will be permitted
only during those portions of the
meeting that are open to the public.
Further information regarding this
meeting can be obtained by contacting
the Designated Federal Official between
8:15 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. (ET). Persons
planning to attend this meeting are
urged to contact the above named
individual at least two working days
prior to the meeting to be advised of any
potential changes in the agenda.
Dated: August 31, 2006.
Michael R. Snodderly,
Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.
[FR Doc. 06–7504 Filed 9–5–06; 10:18 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Draft Regulatory Guide: Issuance,
Availability
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has issued for public
comment a draft of a new guide in the
agency’s Regulatory Guide Series. This
series has been developed to describe
and make available to the public such
information as methods that are
acceptable to the NRC staff for
implementing specific parts of the
NRC’s regulations, techniques that the
staff uses in evaluating specific
problems or postulated accidents, and
data that the staff needs in its review of
applications for permits and licenses.
The draft regulatory guide, entitled
‘‘Combined License Applications for
Nuclear Power Plants (LWR Edition),’’ is
temporarily identified by its task
number, DG–1145, which should be
mentioned in all related
correspondence. This proposed
regulatory guide contains guidance for
use in submitting combined license
(COL) applications in compliance with
the Commission’s regulations in Title 10
Part 52 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR Part 52), ‘‘Early
Site Permits; Design Certifications; and
Combined Licenses for Nuclear Power
Plants.’’ Specifically, 10 CFR Part 52
governs the issuance of early site
permits, standard design certifications,
and combined licenses for nuclear
power plants.
In February 1972, the NRC initially
published Regulatory Guide 1.70,
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
‘‘Standard Format and Content of Safety
Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power
Plants (LWR Edition),’’ which the
nuclear industry has since used in
preparing applications for construction
permits and operating licenses for new
nuclear power plants. The NRC most
recently revised Regulatory Guide 1.70
in November 1978 and, since that time,
the Commission has established a new
process for licensing new reactors. That
process, described in detail in 10 CFR
Part 52, allows an applicant to reference
an early site permit (ESP), a design
certification (DC), both, or neither, in a
COL application. The NRC has
developed Draft Regulatory Guide DG–
1145 to provide guidance to applicants
who plan to use this new process.
The NRC initially issued 10 CFR Part
52 in April 1989 to offer alternative
licensing (ESP, standard DC, COL, and
manufacturing license) processes for
new nuclear power plants. More
recently, the agency proposed a revision
of the rule on March 13, 2006, (71 FR
12782), to clarify the applicability of
various requirements to each of the
licensing processes. This Draft
Regulatory Guide, DG–1145, is based on
the proposed revised rule. The specific
requirements pertaining to technical
requirements for content of applications
are contained in proposed 10 CFR 52.79,
‘‘Contents of applications, general
requirements’’ and proposed 10 CFR
52.80, ‘‘Contents of applications,
additional technical information.’’ The
final Regulatory Guide will be
conformed to the final rule that is
adopted by the Commission, and will be
issued when that final rule is available.
At this time, the NRC staff is soliciting
comments on Draft Regulatory Guide
DG–1145. Comments may be
accompanied by relevant information or
supporting data, and should mention
DG–1145 in the subject line. Comments
submitted in writing or in electronic
form will be made available to the
public in their entirety through the
NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS).
Personal information will not be
removed from your comments. You may
submit comments by any of the
following methods.
Mail comments to: Rules and
Directives Branch, Office of
Administration, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
E-mail comments to:
NRCREP@nrc.gov. You may also submit
comments via the NRC’s rulemaking
Web site at https://ruleforum.llnl.gov/cgibin/rulemake?source=rg&st=draftrg.
Address questions about our rulemaking
E:\FR\FM\07SEN1.SGM
07SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 173 (Thursday, September 7, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 52824-52826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-14774]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-460; Nuclear Project No. 1 (WNP-1)]
Energy Northwest; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is terminating
Construction Permit No. CPPR-134 issued to Washington Public Power
Supply System (permittee, now doing business as Energy Northwest) for
the Nuclear Project No. 1 (WNP-1). The facility is located at Energy
Northwest's site on the Department of Energy's Hanford Reservation in
Benton County, Washington, approximately 8 miles north of Richland,
Washington.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action is issuance of an Order that would terminate
Construction Permit No. CPPR-134 for the partially completed and
previously deferred WNP-1 facility. Because the construction permit for
Unit 4 (WNP-4) was effectively subsumed in the Unit 1 construction
permit on November 27, 1985, the proposed action would terminate NRC
oversight at the Unit 1 and Unit 4 site area. The proposed action is in
response to Energy Northwest's request dated August 9, 2005,
supplemented by letter dated July 7, 2006.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to allow the permitee to undertake
other activities (aside from the construction and possible future
operation of a nuclear power plant) at the WNP-1 and WNP-4 site area.
For example, Energy Northwest is investigating the possible use of the
WNP-\1/4\ site for an industrial park. An application for an operating
license was filed with the NRC for WNP-1; the Operating License
Proceeding was terminated by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on
July 26, 2000. The construction permit for Unit 1 would have expired on
June 1, 2011. Energy Northwest requested the termination of the WNP-1
construction permit because it has determined that it will not complete
construction of either WNP-1 or WNP-4; it has terminated the
construction of the nuclear power plants as well as the maintenance of
layup activities such that neither unit can be operated as a
utilization facility.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The WNP-1 and adjacent WNP-4 sites are located on a portion of the
Hanford Reservation in Washington State that the permittee has leased
from U.S. Department of Energy. The environmental impacts associated
with the construction of the facility have been previously discussed
and evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement (FES) prepared as
part of the NRC staff's review of the construction permit application,
NUREG-75/012, March 1975. Construction was suspended on the partially-
completed WNP-1 Project in 1982.
The construction of WNP-1 was approximately 65 percent complete;
therefore, most of the construction impacts discussed in the FES have
already occurred. This action would terminate the authorization to
conduct any of the remaining construction activities described in the
FES and would also terminate NRC's oversight for activities at the site
area.
Restoration of the site is being conducted in accordance with
Washington State Energy Facility Site Evaluation Council (EFSEC)
Resolution No. 302 (Resolution). This resolution contains the
requirements and schedule for restoration of the WNP-1 and WNP-4 sites,
as agreed to by Energy Northwest, Bonneville Power Administration, U.S.
Department of Energy, and the State of Washington. This agreement,
approved by the four parties in December 2003, stipulated restoration
activities in two phases--near term (within 18 to 24 months) and final
restoration (within approximately 26 years, or by the end of 2029). The
NRC staff assessed the scope of the restoration activities addressed in
the Resolution and has determined that the goals and objectives of such
activities, when carried out, would achieve an environmentally stable
and aesthetically acceptable site. Energy Northwest has stated that all
near term activities have been completed.
Near term restoration activities that have been completed at the
WNP-1 and WNP-4 site area include: removal of hazardous materials (such
as asbestos, mercury vapor lights, transformer mineral oil or
polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs], diesel fuel, lubricants, and
solvents); installation of secure access doors or permanent sealing of
points of entry to the remaining structures on the sites; relocation of
fencing and installation of new fencing to minimize the land area and
to reduce unauthorized entry potential such that security patrols are
not required; installation of ``No Trespassing'' signs; elimination of
fall hazards; fencing of exterior substations and distribution load
centers to minimize the potential for entry; and removal of temporary
buildings that are neither safe nor feasible for reuse.
The Unit 1 Containment Building has been cleaned to remove trash,
debris, overhead hazards, scaffolding, and formwork. Under the
Resolution, this building will remain intact as constructed--no further
actions will be needed for the Unit 1 containment at the final
restoration phase.
The Unit 4 Containment Building has been cleaned to remove trash,
debris, overhead hazards, scaffolding, and formwork. This building was
filled with compacted earth to elevation 479' and a 6'' thick concrete
floor was poured at that level. (The ground elevation around the
containment and general services buildings at WNP-1 and WNP-4 is
approximately 455' above mean sea level.) Openings in the Unit 4
Containment Building were either sealed or fitted with anti-bird
roosting screens; building protrusions were minimized or fitted with
anti-bird roosting screens. Provision was made for water drainage.
Under the Resolution, this building will remain in its existing
condition--no further actions will be needed for the Unit 4 containment
at the final restoration phase.
[[Page 52825]]
The Unit 1 General Services Building has had concrete roofs poured
at elevations 518' and 543'. Under the Resolution, this building will
remain intact as constructed. The upper levels of the Unit 4 General
Services Building interior has been cleaned to remove trash, debris,
overhead hazards, scaffolding, and formwork. The lower areas of the
Unit 4 General Services Building, where no access is required, will not
be cleaned. The walls have been demolished to the 501' elevation. Metal
roofing with a (painted polystyrene) coating has been installed at
elevations 501' and 479' to seal the building. Under the Resolution,
both buildings will remain in their current configuration--no further
actions will be needed for the Unit 1 or the Unit 4 General Services
Building at the final restoration phase.
The interior of the Unit 1 Turbine-Generator Building has been
cleaned to remove trash, debris, and overhead hazards. This building
will be demolished and removed at the Final Restoration phase. Under
the Resolution, the Unit 1 turbine pedestal will remain after
demolition and removal of the building.
Construction of the WNP-4 Turbine-Generator Building was halted
following completion of the building shell (structural steel, floor
slabs, walls, roof, exterior siding, etc.). These elements were
demolished in 1990 prior to the restoration agreement with EFSEC. Only
the turbine pedestal and portions of the ground floor slab remain.
Under the Resolution, the Unit 4 turbine pedestal will remain intact as
constructed--no further actions will be needed for the Unit 4 turbine
pedestal at the final restoration phase.
The Unit 1 and Unit 4 spray ponds have had separate fences
installed around the ponds. The interiors of the Unit 1 and Unit 4 Pump
House Buildings have been cleaned to remove trash, debris, overhead
hazards, scaffolding, and formwork. Under the Resolution, final
restoration for these structures will consist of removal of the
buildings and backfilling of the spray ponds.
The Unit 1 and Unit 4 cooling towers have had chain link fences
with locked gates installed to secure access to the cooling tower
stairwells. Anti-bird screens have been added to minimize access by
birds. Under the Resolution, final restoration activities for the Unit
1 and Unit 4 cooling towers will include demolition of the existing
structures to grade and removal of the basin slabs.
During the final restoration phase, all slabs and most structures
(except for the Containment Buildings, General Services Buildings, and
turbine pedestals) will be removed. The landfill will be closed and
capped, the large underground circulating water lines will be
backfilled, all roads and rail lines will be removed and graded, and
all yard areas will be cleaned, contoured, graded and seeded
implementing best management practices. After the final restoration
activities have been completed, the structures remaining permanently in
place at the sites will be limited to the Units 1 and 4 Containment
Buildings, General Services Buildings, and turbine pedestals.
The permit issued by the Army Corps of Engineers for the submerged
river water intake structure requires that if Energy Northwest decides
to abandon the intake structure, Energy Northwest must restore the area
to a condition satisfactory to the district engineer. At this time, the
river intake structure may be a part of future plans for use of the
site and abandonment is not under consideration.
The NRC staff conducted an audit of the site area encompassing WNP-
1 and WNP-4 on April 24 and 25, 2006, to determine whether posession of
source, byproduct or special nuclear material was controlled as
authorized, to determine whether the site area is being maintained in a
safe and stable manner, and to assess key environmental aspects of the
site. The staff observed selected portions of the Containment
Buildings, General Services Buildings, spray ponds, cooling towers, the
Unit 1 Turbine-Generator Building, Pump House Buildings, and other site
buildings. The staff also observed that erosion controls were being
maintained. The staff assessed the effectiveness of the measures
already taken under the near term phase of site restoration plan and
concluded that restoration activities appear to meet the goals and
objectives of Washington State EFSEC Resolution No. 302.
Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff has concluded that the
proposed action would have no significant environmental impact. The
staff also concluded that there is reasonable assurance that the
remaining site restoration activities under the Resolution will achieve
an environmentally stable and aesthetically acceptable site for
whatever non-nuclear use may conform with local zoning laws and
Department of Energy authorizations.
The site area cannot be used for the utilization facility
envisioned under CPPR-134. No nuclear fuel was ever received on site.
The site area is in an environmentally stable condition that poses no
significant hazard to persons onsite. The facility cannot be operated
in its present condition. Because this proposed action would only
terminate the construction permit, it does not involve any different
impacts or involve a significant change to those impacts described and
analyzed in the FES. Consequently, an environmental impact statement
addressing the proposed action is not required.
Because the proposed construction permit termination Order is for a
project that was suspended 24 years ago, the action is judged to be
administrative in nature and would have no significant environmental
impact. It does not involve any different impacts as described and
analyzed in the Staff's FES and will not involve any impacts beyond
those already described and analyzed in the FES. The proposed action
will terminate the NRC's involvement on the project.
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
The only alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the
request, i.e., the ``no action'' alternative. This alternative would
still result in the conduct of the activities prescribed for final
restoration in the four-party agreement dated December 3, 2003. This
alternative would necessitate continued oversight by NRC of a project
that has ceased construction and has no likelihood of completion; that
will not be operated as a utilization facility; that has stable
environmental conditions; and that continues to be subject to oversight
by other regulatory agencies--all with no significant environmental
benefit. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the ``no
action'' alternative are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
This action does not involve the use of resources not previously
considered in the FES for WNP-1.
Agencies and Persons Contacted
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 31, 2006, the staff
consulted with the Washington State Official, Mr. Richard Cowley,
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 this 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 this action.
[[Page 52826]]
For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's
request for construction permit termination dated August 9, 2005,
supplemented by letter dated July 7, 2006. Documents may be examined,
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room, located at
One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville,
Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically
from the Agency wide Documents Access and Management Systems (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 1-800-397-4029 or 301-415-4737, or send an e-mail to
pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 31st day of August 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Brian J. Benney,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E6-14774 Filed 9-6-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P