Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.; Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 43169-43170 [E9-20586]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 26, 2009 / Notices
The 2009 Regolith Excavation
Challenge is being administered by the
California Space Education & Workforce
Institute (CSEWI) for NASA. The
$750,000USD prize purse is funded by
NASA. This event will be conducted in
a format which brings all competitors to
a single location for a ‘‘head to head’’
competition.
DATES: The 2009 Regolith Excavation
Challenge is scheduled for October 17–
18, 2009.
Location: The 2009 Regolith
Excavation Challenge will be held at the
NASA Research Park in Moffett Field,
California. For more information, see:
https://researchpark.arc.nasa.gov.
FURTHER INFORMATION: To register for
and get additional information regarding
the 2009 Regolith Excavation Challenge
including Rules, Team Agreement,
eligibility, and prize criteria, visit the
Web site: https://regolith.csewi.org or
contact Mr. Error! Reference source not
found. at CSEWI, 3201 Airpark Drive
Suite 204, Santa Maria, CA 93455.
Phone: 805–349–2633 or e-mail:
matt.everingham@californiaspace
authority.org.
If you have questions or comments
regarding the NASA Centennial
Challenges Program visit the Web site:
https://www.ipp.nasa.gov/cc or contact
Mr. Andrew Petro, Innovative
Partnerships Program Office, NASA
Headquarters, 300 E Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20546–0001. E-mail:
andrew.j.petro@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 2009
Regolith Excavation Challenge total
purse of $750,000 will go to the winning
teams excavating the most regolith, in
excess of 150 kilograms, within a 30minute duration. The First, Second and
Third prizes are $500,000, $150,000 and
$100,000, respectively.
In case of individuals, prizes can only
be awarded to US Citizens or permanent
residents. In the case of corporations or
other entities, prizes can only be
awarded to those that are incorporated
in and maintain a primary place of
business in the United States.
Dated: August 18, 2009.
Douglas A. Comstock,
Director, Innovative Partnerships Program
Office.
[FR Doc. E9–20402 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am]
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Conservation Act of 1978 Notice of
Waste Permit Application Received
AGENCY:
National Science Foundation.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:05 Aug 25, 2009
Jkt 217001
ACTION: Notice of permit application
received under the Antarctic
Conservation Act and request for
comments.
SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that
the National Science Foundation (NSF)
has received a waste management
permit application for the United States
Antarctic Program (USAP), submitted to
NSF pursuant to regulations issued
under the Antarctic Conservation Act of
1978.
DATES: Interested parties are invited to
submit written data, comments, or
views with respect to this permit
application on or before September 25,
2009. The permit application may be
inspected by interested parties at the
Permit Office, address below.
ADDRESSES: Comments should be
addressed to Permit Office, Room 755,
Office of Polar Programs, National
Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson
Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia 22230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Polly A. Penhale at the above address or
at (703) 292–7420.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Antarctic
Waste Regulations in 45 CFR part 671
require U.S. citizens, corporations, or
other entities to obtain a permit for the
use or release of designated pollutants
in Antarctica and for the release of any
waste in the Antarctic. NSF has received
a permit application under this
regulation for USAP activities in
Antarctica. The permit applicant is:
Raytheon Polar Services Company, 7400
South Tucson Way, Centennial, CO
80112.
The permit application applies to
USAP activities conducted by all
supporting organizations at all USAP
facilities and operations in Antarctica.
The proposed duration of the permit is
from October 1, 2009 through
September 30, 2014.
Raytheon Polar Services Company
(RPSC) and other supporting
organizations provide broad-based
logistical support, technical support,
and transportation services to the USAP.
This includes the transport of both
hazardous and non-hazardous waste
from Antarctica to the United States.
RPSC operations include procuring,
transporting to Antarctica, and tracking
materials containing designated
pollutants that are required for USAP
operations, and for NSF and NSF
grantees. RPSC is also responsible for
fuel operations including fuel storage,
distribution, and resupply; and recordkeeping of fuel use. RPSC collects,
stores, and ships both hazardous and
non-hazardous waste materials and is
responsible for the final disposition of
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
43169
these materials once they are returned to
the United States. RPSC also provides
training and technical guidance to
enhance the safety and effectiveness of
U.S. waste management practices in
Antarctica.
Nadene G. Kennedy,
Permit Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–20564 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–348 and 50–364; NRC–
2009–0375]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company,
Inc.; Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant;
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an Exemption, pursuant to
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5,
‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from 10 CFR
Part 73, ‘‘Physical protection of plants
and materials,’’ for Facility Operating
License Nos. NPF–2 and NPF–8, issued
to Southern Nuclear Operating
Company, Inc. (SNC, the licensee), for
operation of the Joseph M. Farley
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (FNP),
located in Houston County, Alabama. In
accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC
prepared an environmental assessment
documenting its finding. The NRC
concluded that the proposed actions
will have no significant environmental
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
the FNP from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for several new requirements of 10 CFR
part 73. Specifically, FNP would be
granted an exemption from being in full
compliance with certain new
requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.55
by the March 31, 2010, deadline.
Instead, SNC has proposed an alternate
full compliance implementation date of
December 15, 2010, approximately eight
and a half months beyond the date
required by 10 CFR part 73. The
proposed action, an extension of the
schedule for completion of certain
actions required by the revised 10 CFR
part 73, does not involve any physical
changes to the reactor, fuel, plant
structures, support structures, water, or
land at the FNP site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
43170
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 164 / Wednesday, August 26, 2009 / Notices
June 9, 2009, as supplemented by letter
dated July 31, 2009.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to
provide the licensee with additional
time to perform the required upgrades to
the FNP security system due to resource
and logistical impacts of the spring 2010
Unit 2 and fall 2010 Unit 1 refueling
outages and other factors.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its
environmental assessment of the
proposed exemption. The staff has
concluded that the proposed action to
extend the implementation deadline
would not significantly affect plant
safety and would not have a significant
adverse effect on the probability of an
accident occurring. The proposed action
would not result in an increased
radiological hazard beyond those
previously analyzed. There will be no
change to radioactive effluents that
effect radiation exposures to plant
workers and members of the public. The
proposed action does not involve a
change to plant buildings or land areas
on the FNP site. Therefore, no changes
or different types of radiological impacts
are expected as a result of the proposed
exemption.
The proposed action does not result
in changes to land use or water use, or
result in changes to the quality or
quantity of non-radiological effluents.
No changes to the National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System permit
are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity or the
plant, or to threatened, endangered, or
protected species under the Endangered
Species Act, or impacts to essential fish
habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens Act are expected. There are no
impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and
cultural resources. There would be no
impact to socioeconomic resources.
Therefore, no changes to or different
types of non-radiological environmental
impacts are expected as a result of the
proposed exemption. Accordingly, the
NRC concludes that there are no
significant environmental impacts
associated with the proposed action.
With its request to extend the
implementation deadline, the licensee
has proposed compensatory measures to
be taken in lieu of full compliance with
the new requirements specified in 10
CFR part 73. The licensee currently
maintains a security system acceptable
to the NRC and the proposed
compensatory measures will continue to
provide acceptable physical protection
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:05 Aug 25, 2009
Jkt 217001
of the FNP in lieu of the new
requirements in 10 CFR part 73.
Therefore, the extension of the
implementation date of the new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to
December 15, 2010, would not have any
significant environmental impacts.
The NRC 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.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
actions, the NRC staff considered denial
of the proposed actions (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the
exemption request would result in no
change in current environmental
impacts. The environmental impacts of
the proposed exemption and technical
specification change and the ‘‘no
action’’ alternative are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of
any different resources than those
considered in the Final Environmental
Statement for the FNP, as supplemented
through the ‘‘Generic Environmental
Impact Statement for License Renewal
of Nuclear Plants: Joseph M. Farley
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2—Final
Report (NUREG—1437, Supplement
18).’’
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on August 13, 2009, the NRC staff
consulted with the Alabama State
official, Mr. Kirk Whatley of the
Alabama 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.
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s
letters dated June 9 and July 31, 2009.
The June 9, 2009, letter and certain parts
of the July 31, 2009, submittal contain
proprietary and safeguards information
and, accordingly, are not available to the
public. Other parts of these 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, Rockville,
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Maryland 20852. Publicly available
records will be accessible electronically
from the Agencywide Document 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 August 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert E. Martin,
Sr. Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch
II, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9–20586 Filed 8–25–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on Reactor
Safeguards (ACRS) Meeting of the
Materials, Metallurgy, and Reactor
Fuels Subcommittee; Notice of
Meeting
The ACRS Subcommittee on the
Materials, Metallurgy and Reactor Fuels
will hold a meeting on September 23,
2009, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Commissioner’s Conference Room
O1F16, One White Flint North,
Rockville, Maryland.
The entire meeting will be open to
public attendance. The agenda for the
subject meeting shall be as follows:
Wednesday, September 23, 2009—
8:30 a.m.–5 p.m.
The Subcommittee will discuss the
‘‘three-dimensional’’ finite element
analysis of the Oyster Creek drywell
shell. The Subcommittee will hear
presentations by and hold discussions
with representatives of the NRC staff
and other interested persons regarding
this matter. The Subcommittee will
gather information, analyze relevant
issues and facts, and formulate
proposed positions and actions, as
appropriate, for deliberation by the full
Committee.
Members of the public desiring to
provide oral statements and/or written
comments should notify the Designated
Federal Official, Peter Wen, telephone:
301–415–2832, e-mail:
Peter.Wen@nrc.gov, five days prior to
the meeting, if possible, so that
appropriate arrangements can be made.
Thirty-five hard copies of each
presentation or handout should be
E:\FR\FM\26AUN1.SGM
26AUN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 164 (Wednesday, August 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43169-43170]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-20586]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364; NRC-2009-0375]
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.; Joseph M. Farley
Nuclear Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant
Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuance of an Exemption, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5, ``Specific exemptions,'' from 10 CFR
Part 73, ``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Facility
Operating License Nos. NPF-2 and NPF-8, issued to Southern Nuclear
Operating Company, Inc. (SNC, the licensee), for operation of the
Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 (FNP), located in Houston
County, Alabama. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared an
environmental assessment documenting its finding. The NRC concluded
that the proposed actions will have no significant environmental
impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the FNP from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for several new requirements of
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, FNP would be granted an exemption from
being in full compliance with certain new requirements contained in 10
CFR 73.55 by the March 31, 2010, deadline. Instead, SNC has proposed an
alternate full compliance implementation date of December 15, 2010,
approximately eight and a half months beyond the date required by 10
CFR part 73. The proposed action, an extension of the schedule for
completion of certain actions required by the revised 10 CFR part 73,
does not involve any physical changes to the reactor, fuel, plant
structures, support structures, water, or land at the FNP site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated
[[Page 43170]]
June 9, 2009, as supplemented by letter dated July 31, 2009.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to provide the licensee with
additional time to perform the required upgrades to the FNP security
system due to resource and logistical impacts of the spring 2010 Unit 2
and fall 2010 Unit 1 refueling outages and other factors.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed
exemption. The staff has concluded that the proposed action to extend
the implementation deadline would not significantly affect plant safety
and would not have a significant adverse effect on the probability of
an accident occurring. The proposed action would not result in an
increased radiological hazard beyond those previously analyzed. There
will be no change to radioactive effluents that effect radiation
exposures to plant workers and members of the public. The proposed
action does not involve a change to plant buildings or land areas on
the FNP site. Therefore, no changes or different types of radiological
impacts are expected as a result of the proposed exemption.
The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-
radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity or the plant, or to threatened,
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act
are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There would
be no impact to socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no changes to or
different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are expected
as a result of the proposed exemption. Accordingly, the NRC concludes
that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the
proposed action.
With its request to extend the implementation deadline, the
licensee has proposed compensatory measures to be taken in lieu of full
compliance with the new requirements specified in 10 CFR part 73. The
licensee currently maintains a security system acceptable to the NRC
and the proposed compensatory measures will continue to provide
acceptable physical protection of the FNP in lieu of the new
requirements in 10 CFR part 73. Therefore, the extension of the
implementation date of the new requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to
December 15, 2010, would not have any significant environmental
impacts.
The NRC 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.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed actions, the NRC staff considered
denial of the proposed actions (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative).
Denial of the exemption request would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed
exemption and technical specification change and the ``no action''
alternative are similar.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the FNP, as
supplemented through the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant,
Units 1 and 2--Final Report (NUREG--1437, Supplement 18).''
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 13, 2009, the NRC
staff consulted with the Alabama State official, Mr. Kirk Whatley of
the Alabama 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.
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letters dated June 9 and July 31, 2009. The June 9, 2009,
letter and certain parts of the July 31, 2009, submittal contain
proprietary and safeguards information and, accordingly, are not
available to the public. Other parts of these 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,
Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available records will be
accessible electronically from the Agencywide Document 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 August 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert E. Martin,
Sr. Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-20586 Filed 8-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
