Southern California Edison Company; San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3, Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 79936-79937 [E8-30948]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
79936
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 250 / Tuesday, December 30, 2008 / Notices
environmental impacts of the proposed
action and the no-action alternative are
therefore similar, and the no-action
alternative is accordingly not further
considered.
Conclusion
The NRC staff has concluded that the
proposed action is consistent with the
NRC’s unrestricted release criteria
specified in 10 CFR 20.1402. Because
the proposed action will not
significantly impact the quality of the
human environment, the NRC staff
concludes that the proposed action is
the preferred alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
NRC provided a draft of this
Environmental Assessment to the State
of Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection’s Division of
Radiation for review on September 16,
2008. On October 7, 2008, the State of
Connecticut Department of
Environmental Protection’s Division of
Radiation responded by e-mail. The
State agreed with the conclusions of the
EA, and otherwise had no comments.
The NRC staff has determined that the
proposed action is of a procedural
nature, and will not affect listed species
or critical habitat. Therefore, no further
consultation is required under Section 7
of the Endangered Species Act. The
NRC staff has also determined that the
proposed action is not the type of
activity that has the potential to cause
effects on historic properties. Therefore,
no further consultation is required
under Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has prepared this EA in
support of the proposed action. On the
basis of this EA, the NRC finds that
there are no significant environmental
impacts from the proposed action, and
that preparation of an environmental
impact statement is not warranted.
Accordingly, the NRC has determined
that a Finding of No Significant Impact
is appropriate.
this action are listed below, along with
their ADAMS accession numbers.
[1]. Licensee’s letter dated April 16,
2008 (ML081150270);
[2]. Licensee’s letter dated May 15,
2008 (ML081480490);
[3]. NUREG–1757, ‘‘Consolidated
NMSS Decommissioning Guidance;’’
[4]. Title 10 Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 20, Subpart E,
‘‘Radiological Criteria for License
Termination;’’
[5]. Title 10, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 51, ‘‘Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic
Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions;’’ and
[6]. NUREG–1496, ‘‘Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in
Support of Rulemaking on Radiological
Criteria for License Termination of NRCLicensed Nuclear Facilities.’’
If you do not have access to ADAMS,
or if there are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR)
Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–
415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov.
These documents may also be viewed
electronically on the public computers
located at the NRC’s PDR, O 1 F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR
reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
Dated at NRC Region I at 475 Allendale
Road, King of Prussia, PA this 18th day of
December.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James P. Dwyer,
Chief, Commercial and R&D Branch, Division
of Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I.
[FR Doc. E8–30944 Filed 12–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–362]
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
IV. Further Information
Southern California Edison Company;
San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station, Unit 3, Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
Documents related to this action,
including the application for license
amendment and supporting
documentation, are available
electronically at the NRC’s Electronic
Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html. From this site,
you can access the NRC’s Agencywide
Document Access and Management
System (ADAMS), which provides text
and image files of NRC’s public
documents. The documents related to
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 74, Section 74.19(c), for
Facility Operating License No. NPF–15,
issued to Southern California Edison
Company (SCE, the licensee), for
operation of the San Onofre Nuclear
Generating Station (SONGS), Unit 3,
located in San Diego County, California.
Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:55 Dec 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
Frm 00148
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the NRC is issuing this environmental
assessment and finding of no significant
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action:
The regulation 10 CFR 74.19(c) states,
‘‘Other than licensees subject to
Sections 74.31, 74.33, 74.41, or 74.51,
each licensee who is authorized to
possess special nuclear material, at any
one time and site location, in a quantity
greater than 350 grams of contained
uranium-235, uranium-233, or
plutonium, or any combination thereof,
shall conduct a physical inventory of all
special nuclear material in its
possession under license at intervals not
to exceed 12 months.’’
By application dated January 14,
2008, the licensee requested an
exemption from certain recordkeeping
requirements in Section 74.19(c) for
SONGS Unit 3. The exemption would
allow SCE to deviate from the physical
inventory requirements for 12 irradiated
fission chambers removed from SONGS
3 in 1995 and in storage at the plant.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would allow the
licensee to not have to perform physical
inventory of the 12 irradiated fission
chambers that are stored in the plant.
The licensee pointed out that the as
low as is reasonably achievable
(ALARA) requirement in 10 CFR Part
20, ‘‘Standards for protection against
radiation,’’ requires ‘‘* * * making
every reasonable effort to maintain
exposures to radiation as far below the
dose limits in this part as is practical
consistent with the purpose for which
the licensed activity is undertaken,
* * *.’’ This request for an exemption
from the physical inventory
requirements of 10 CFR 74.19(c) would
relieve SCE of significant and
unnecessary personnel exposures with
no decrease in quality and safety.
Environmental Impacts of the
Proposed Action:
NRC completed its safety evaluation
of the proposed action and concludes
that the exempting the licensee from
performing a physical inventory of the
12 irradiated fission chambers in the
plant is acceptable.
The details of the staff’s safety
evaluation will be provided in the
exemption that will be issued as part of
the letter to the licensee approving the
exemption to the regulation.
The proposed action will not
significantly increase the probability or
consequences of accidents. No changes
are being made in the types of effluents
that may be released off site. There is no
significant increase in the amount of
any effluent released off site. There is no
E:\FR\FM\30DEN1.SGM
30DEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 250 / Tuesday, December 30, 2008 / Notices
pwalker on PROD1PC71 with NOTICES
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 non-radiological
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that
there are no significant environmental
impacts associated with the proposed
action.
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 Units 2 and 3 dated May 12,
1981.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy,
on October 22, 2008, the staff consulted
with the California State official, Roger
Lupo of the Radiologic Health Branch of
the California Department of Public
Health, 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.
The licensee requested that the
application be withheld from public
disclosure, in accordance with 10 CFR
2.390, because it contained sensitive
security-related information. The NRC
staff agrees that the licensee’s
application dated January 14, 2008,
contains security-related information
and should be withheld in its entirety.
Therefore, no further details with
respect to the proposed action are
publicly available.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day
of December 2008.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
22:55 Dec 29, 2008
Jkt 217001
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nageswaran Kalyanam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8–30948 Filed 12–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030–34493]
Notice of Availability of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment to Byproduct Nuclear
Materials License No. 45–25402–01, for
Termination of the License and
Unrestricted Release of the Upstate
Group, Inc., Facility in Charlottesville,
VA
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Issuance of Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact for License
Amendment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas K. Thompson, Sr. Health
Physicist, Commercial and Research &
Development Branch, Division of
Nuclear Materials Safety, Region I, 475
Allendale Road, King of Prussia,
Pennsylvania 19406; telephone (610)
337–5303; fax number (610) 337–5269;
or by e-mail:
thomas.thompson@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of a license amendment to
byproduct materials License No. 45–
25402–01. This license is held by
Upstate Group, Inc. (the Licensee), for
its facility located at 706 Forrest Street,
Charlottesville, Virginia (the Facility).
Issuance of the amendment would
authorize release of the Facility for
unrestricted use and termination of the
NRC license. The Licensee requested
this action in a letter dated January 3,
2008. The NRC has prepared an
Environmental Assessment (EA) in
support of this proposed action in
accordance with the requirements of
Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Part 51 (10 CFR Part 51). Based
on the EA, the NRC has concluded that
a Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI) is appropriate with respect to
the proposed action. The amendment
will be issued to the Licensee following
the publication of this FONSI and EA in
the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00149
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
79937
II. Environmental Assessment
Identification of Proposed Action
The proposed action would approve
the Licensee’s January 3, 2008, license
amendment request, resulting in release
of the Facility for unrestricted use and
the termination of its NRC materials
license. License No. 45–25402–01 was
issued on October 31, 1997, pursuant to
10 CFR Part 30, and has been amended
periodically since that time. This
license authorized the Licensee to use
unsealed byproduct materials for the
purposes of conducting research and
development activities on laboratory
bench tops and in hoods.
The Facility is a two story building
located in a mixed residential/
commercial area. The licensee occupied
approximately 12,000 square feet of
space on the second floor of the
building, consisting of office space and
laboratories. Within the Facility, use of
licensed materials was confined to
Laboratories 115 and 110A.
Routine licensed activities ceased in
2002 and the licensee initiated a survey
of the Facility. Based on the Licensee’s
historical knowledge of the site and the
conditions of the Facility, the Licensee
determined that only routine
decontamination activities, in
accordance with the NRC-approved
operating radiation safety procedures,
would be required. The Licensee was
not required to submit a
decommissioning plan to the NRC
because worker cleanup activities and
procedures are consistent with those
approved for routine operations. The
Licensee conducted surveys of the
Facility and provided information to the
NRC to demonstrate that it meets the
criteria in Subpart E of 10 CFR Part 20
for unrestricted release and for license
termination.
Need for the Proposed Action
The Licensee has ceased conducting
licensed activities at the Facility, and
seeks the unrestricted use of its Facility
and the termination of its NRC materials
license. Termination of its license
would end the Licensee’s obligation to
pay annual license fees to the NRC.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The historical review of licensed
activities conducted at the Facility
shows that such activities involved use
of the following radionuclides with halflives greater than 120 days in unsealed
form: Hydrogen-3 and carbon-14. The
Licensee conducted a final status survey
in December 2006. This survey covered
the areas of use at the Facility. The final
status survey report was attached to the
E:\FR\FM\30DEN1.SGM
30DEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 250 (Tuesday, December 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 79936-79937]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-30948]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-362]
Southern California Edison Company; San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station, Unit 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 74, Section 74.19(c), for Facility Operating
License No. NPF-15, issued to Southern California Edison Company (SCE,
the licensee), for operation of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Station (SONGS), Unit 3, located in San Diego County, California.
Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this
environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action:
The regulation 10 CFR 74.19(c) states, ``Other than licensees
subject to Sections 74.31, 74.33, 74.41, or 74.51, each licensee who is
authorized to possess special nuclear material, at any one time and
site location, in a quantity greater than 350 grams of contained
uranium-235, uranium-233, or plutonium, or any combination thereof,
shall conduct a physical inventory of all special nuclear material in
its possession under license at intervals not to exceed 12 months.''
By application dated January 14, 2008, the licensee requested an
exemption from certain recordkeeping requirements in Section 74.19(c)
for SONGS Unit 3. The exemption would allow SCE to deviate from the
physical inventory requirements for 12 irradiated fission chambers
removed from SONGS 3 in 1995 and in storage at the plant.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would allow the licensee to not have to perform
physical inventory of the 12 irradiated fission chambers that are
stored in the plant.
The licensee pointed out that the as low as is reasonably
achievable (ALARA) requirement in 10 CFR Part 20, ``Standards for
protection against radiation,'' requires ``* * * making every
reasonable effort to maintain exposures to radiation as far below the
dose limits in this part as is practical consistent with the purpose
for which the licensed activity is undertaken, * * *.'' This request
for an exemption from the physical inventory requirements of 10 CFR
74.19(c) would relieve SCE of significant and unnecessary personnel
exposures with no decrease in quality and safety.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
NRC completed its safety evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that the exempting the licensee from performing a physical
inventory of the 12 irradiated fission chambers in the plant is
acceptable.
The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in
the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee
approving the exemption to the regulation.
The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability
or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of
effluents that may be released off site. There is no significant
increase in the amount of any effluent released off site. There is no
[[Page 79937]]
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 non-radiological impacts, the proposed
action does not have a potential to affect any historic sites. It does
not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other
environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-
radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
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 Units 2 and 3 dated May 12, 1981.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on October 22, 2008, the
staff consulted with the California State official, Roger Lupo of the
Radiologic Health Branch of the California Department of Public Health,
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.
The licensee requested that the application be withheld from public
disclosure, in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, because it contained
sensitive security-related information. The NRC staff agrees that the
licensee's application dated January 14, 2008, contains security-
related information and should be withheld in its entirety. Therefore,
no further details with respect to the proposed action are publicly
available.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 18th day of December 2008.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nageswaran Kalyanam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E8-30948 Filed 12-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
