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 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: http://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: http://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: http://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: http:// 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: http://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