Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3, Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 9036-9037 [E7-3476]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
9036
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices
license of a utilization facility, which
does no more than conform the licenses
to reflect the transfer action, involves no
significant hazards consideration and no
genuine issue as to whether the health
and safety of the public will be
significantly affected. No contrary
determination has been made with
respect to this specific license
amendment application. In light of the
generic determination reflected in 10
CFR 2.1315, no public comments with
respect to significant hazards
considerations are being solicited,
notwithstanding the general comment
procedures contained in 10 CFR 50.91.
The filing of requests for hearing and
petitions for leave to intervene, and
written comments with regard to the
license transfer application, are
discussed below.
Within 20 days from the date of
publication of this notice, any person
whose interest may be affected by the
Commission’s action on the application
may request a hearing and, if not the
applicant, may petition for leave to
intervene in a hearing proceeding on the
Commission’s action. Requests for a
hearing and petitions for leave to
intervene should be filed in accordance
with the Commission’s rules of practice
set forth in Subpart C ‘‘Rules of General
Applicability: Hearing Requests,
Petitions to Intervene, Availability of
Documents, Selection of Specific
Hearing Procedures, Presiding Officer
Powers, and General Hearing
Management for NRC Adjudicatory
Hearings,’’ of 10 CFR Part 2. In
particular, such requests and petitions
must comply with the requirements set
forth in 10 CFR 2.309. Untimely
requests and petitions may be denied, as
provided in 10 CFR 2.309(c)(1), unless
good cause for failure to file on time is
established. In addition, an untimely
request or petition should address the
factors that the Commission will also
consider, in reviewing untimely
requests or petitions, set forth in 10 CFR
2.309(c)(1)(I)-(viii).
Requests for a hearing and petitions
for leave to intervene should be served
upon Arthur H. Domby, Troutman
Sanders LLP, 600 Peachtree Street,
Atlanta, GA 30308, telephone: 404–885–
3130, facsimile: 404–962–6546, e-mail:
arthur.domby@troutmansanders.com;
Jonathan Rogoff, Vice President, General
Counsel and Secretary, Nuclear
Management Company, LLC, 700 First
Street, Hudson, WI 54016, telephone:
715–377–3316, facsimile: 715–386–
1013, e-mail:
jonathan.rogoff@nmcco.com; Mitchell
S. Ross, Associate General Counsel, FPL
Energy Point Beach, LLC, 700 Universe
Blvd., Juno Beach, Florida 33408,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:08 Feb 27, 2007
Jkt 211001
telephone: 561–691–7126, facsimile:
561–691–7135, e-mail:
mitch_ross@fpl.com; the General
Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001 (e-mail address for filings
regarding license transfer cases only:
OGCLT@NRC.gov); and the Secretary of
the Commission, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001, Attention: Rulemakings
and Adjudications Staff, in accordance
with 10 CFR 2.302 and 2.305.
The Commission will issue a notice or
order granting or denying a hearing
request or intervention petition,
designating the issues for any hearing
that will be held and designating the
Presiding Officer. A notice granting a
hearing will be published in the Federal
Register and served on the parties to the
hearing.
As an alternative to requests for
hearing and petitions to intervene,
within 30 days from the date of
publication of this notice, persons may
submit written comments regarding the
license transfer application, as provided
for in 10 CFR 2.1305. The Commission
will consider and, if appropriate,
respond to these comments, but such
comments will not otherwise constitute
part of the decisional record. Comments
should be submitted to the Secretary,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff,
and should cite the publication date and
page number of this Federal Register
notice.
For further details with respect to this
action, see the application dated January
26, 2007, available for public inspection
at the Commission’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 Agency wide 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, or 301–415–4737 or by e-mail
to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 22nd day
of February 2007.
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Patrick D. Milano,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch III–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–3474 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–259, 50–260, and 50–296]
Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns
Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 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 R, for Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–33, DPR–
52, and DPR–68, issued to the
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA, the
licensee), for operation of the Browns
Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 1, 2,
and 3, located in Limestone County,
Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10
CFR 50.21, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would allow
intervening combustibles such as the
480V Reactor Building Vent Boards 1B,
2B, and 3B; small panels in Units 1, 2
and 3; and the 1-hour fire rated fire
wrap (Thermo-lag) material in the 20foot separation zones identified.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
October 26, 2006, as supplemented by a
letter dated January 11, 2007.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Section III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR
Part 50 is related to fire protection
features to ensure that components of
redundant trains of equipment,
including cables and circuits, to achieve
and maintain safe-shutdown are free of
fire damage. Either the fire protection
configurations must meet the specific
requirements of Section III.G or an
alternative fire protection configuration
must be justified by a fire hazard
analysis.
During the September 2006 NRC audit
of the Unit 1 Fire Protection Program, it
was identified that 20-foot separation
zones included intervening
combustibles that were not specifically
addressed in an approved exemption by
the NRC dated October 21, 1988. TVA
E:\FR\FM\28FEN1.SGM
28FEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 39 / Wednesday, February 28, 2007 / Notices
has requested this exemption in order to
revise the October 1988 exemption to
include additional combustibles such as
the 480V Reactor Building Vent Boards
1B, 2B, and 3B; small panels in Units 1,
2 and 3; and the one hour fire rated fire
wrap (Thermo-lag) material for the 20foot separation zones identified.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents. The NRC
staff has completed its evaluation of the
proposed exemption and associated
amendment and finds that the
calculated total doses remain within the
acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50.67 and
General Design Criterion 19, and there
is no significant increase in
occupational or public radiation
exposure. The NRC staff, thus,
concludes that granting the proposed
exemption would result in no
significant radiological environmental
impact.
The proposed action does not affect
nonradiological plant effluents or
historical sites, and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there
are no significant nonradiological
impacts associated with the proposed
exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
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 BFN
dated September 1, 1972, for Units 1, 2,
and 3.
sroberts on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on February 6, 2007, the NRC staff
consulted with the Alabama State
official, Kirk Whatley of the Office of
Radiological Control, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official had no
comments.
16:08 Feb 27, 2007
Jkt 211001
On the basis of the environmental
assessment, the Commission concludes
that the proposed action will not have
a significant effect on the quality of the
human environment. Accordingly, the
Commission has determined not to
prepare an environmental impact
statement for the proposed action.
For further details with respect to the
purposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated October 26, 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 O–1 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 send an
e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day
of February 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Eva A. Brown,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II–
2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7–3476 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am]
The Board further proposed expanding
the second system, Mailing List, to
become the Contact List. The Board
determined that the changes to
NWTRB–1 were important enough to
republish the notice with the changes
and that the changes to NWTRB–2 were
substantial enough to accept comments
on the proposed expansion until
January 15, 2007. The Board received no
comments on the proposed expansion.
DATES: The changes to NWTRB–2 will
become effective on February 28, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Victoria Reich, 703–235–4473.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Board
currently maintains two systems of
records , NWTRB–1 and NWTRB–2, that
contain information covered by the
Privacy Act of 1974. In its review of
these systems, the Board has found
classes of information that were not
included in its previous notice and on
November 22, 2006, republished
NWTRB–1 with the corrections added.
The Board further found that expanding
the records in NWTRB–2 would make it
more useful and requested comments
from the public from November 22,
2006, until January 15, 2007. No
comments were received during this
period. Accordingly, the Board plans to
proceed with the proposed changes on
February 28, 2007.
Dated: February 23, 2007.
William D. Barnard,
Executive Director, U.S. Nuclear Waste
Technical Review Board.
[FR Doc. 07–885 Filed 2–27–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
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
exemption would result in no change in
current environmental impacts. Thus,
the environmental impacts of the
proposed action and the alternative
action are similar.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
Finding of No Significant Impact
9037
BILLING CODE 6820–AM–M
NUCLEAR WASTE TECHNICAL
REVIEW BOARD
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Privacy Act of 1974; Systems of
Records
Proposed Demonstration Project; Pay
Banding and Performance-Based Pay
Adjustments in the National Nuclear
Security Administration
U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical
Review Board.
ACTION: Notice of modification to two
existing systems of records.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: 5 U.S.C. 552a requires that
each federal agency review its systems
of records containing personal
information covered by the Privacy Act
of 1974. As a result of its latest review,
the Board is amending both of the
systems of records that it maintains. A
description of these systems was
published in November 22, 2006 (71 FR
67654–67655). The Board proposed
amending NWTRB–1 and expanding
NWTRB–2 to include other information
useful to the Board. In the first system,
Administrative Files, some categories
were overlooked in the previous notice.
PO 00000
Frm 00079
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Notice of a proposed
demonstration project plan.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: Chapter 47 of title 5, United
States Code, authorizes the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM), directly
or in agreement with one or more
agencies, to conduct demonstration
projects that experiment with new and
different human resources management
concepts to determine whether changes
in human resources policy or
procedures would result in improved
Federal human resources management.
The National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and OPM
propose to test a pay banding system in
which within-band pay progression is
E:\FR\FM\28FEN1.SGM
28FEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 39 (Wednesday, February 28, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9036-9037]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-3476]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260, and 50-296]
Tennessee Valley Authority; Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1,
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 R, for Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68, issued to the Tennessee Valley
Authority (TVA, the licensee), for operation of the Browns Ferry
Nuclear Plant (BFN), Units 1, 2, and 3, located in Limestone County,
Alabama. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 50.21, the NRC is issuing
this environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would allow intervening combustibles such as
the 480V Reactor Building Vent Boards 1B, 2B, and 3B; small panels in
Units 1, 2 and 3; and the 1-hour fire rated fire wrap (Thermo-lag)
material in the 20-foot separation zones identified.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated October 26, 2006, as supplemented by a letter dated
January 11, 2007.
The Need for the Proposed Action
Section III.G of Appendix R to 10 CFR Part 50 is related to fire
protection features to ensure that components of redundant trains of
equipment, including cables and circuits, to achieve and maintain safe-
shutdown are free of fire damage. Either the fire protection
configurations must meet the specific requirements of Section III.G or
an alternative fire protection configuration must be justified by a
fire hazard analysis.
During the September 2006 NRC audit of the Unit 1 Fire Protection
Program, it was identified that 20-foot separation zones included
intervening combustibles that were not specifically addressed in an
approved exemption by the NRC dated October 21, 1988. TVA
[[Page 9037]]
has requested this exemption in order to revise the October 1988
exemption to include additional combustibles such as the 480V Reactor
Building Vent Boards 1B, 2B, and 3B; small panels in Units 1, 2 and 3;
and the one hour fire rated fire wrap (Thermo-lag) material for the 20-
foot separation zones identified.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. The NRC staff has completed its
evaluation of the proposed exemption and associated amendment and finds
that the calculated total doses remain within the acceptance criteria
of 10 CFR 50.67 and General Design Criterion 19, and there is no
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. The
NRC staff, thus, concludes that granting the proposed exemption would
result in no significant radiological environmental impact.
The proposed action does not affect nonradiological plant effluents
or historical sites, and has no other environmental impact. Therefore,
there are no significant nonradiological impacts associated with the
proposed exemption.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Alternative to 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 exemption would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. Thus, 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 BFN dated September 1, 1972, for Units 1, 2, and 3.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on February 6, 2007, the NRC
staff consulted with the Alabama State official, Kirk Whatley of the
Office of Radiological Control, 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 Commission
concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect
on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the Commission
has determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the purposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated October 26, 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 O-1 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 send an e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of February 2007.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Eva A. Brown,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-2, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E7-3476 Filed 2-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
