Luminant Generation Company, LLC; Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 61177-61178 [E9-28090]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 224 / Monday, November 23, 2009 / Notices
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY: The Copyright Royalty Judges
are announcing receipt of a notice of
intent to audit the 2006, 2007 and 2008
statements of account submitted by AOL
LLC concerning the royalty payments
made under two statutory licenses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Strasser, Senior Attorney, or
Gina Giuffreda, Attorney Advisor, by
telephone at (202) 707–7658 or e-mail at
crb@loc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1995,
Congress enacted the Digital
Performance Right in Sound Recordings
Act of 1995 (‘‘DPRA’’), Public Law 104–
39, which created an exclusive right for
copyright owners of sound recordings,
subject to certain limitations, to perform
publicly sound recordings by means of
certain digital audio transmissions.
Among the limitations on the
performance right was the creation of a
compulsory license for nonexempt
noninteractive digital subscription
transmissions. 17 U.S.C. 114(f).
Section 114 was later amended with
the passage of the Digital Millennium
Copyright Act of 1998 (‘‘DMCA’’),
Public Law 105–304, to cover additional
digital audio transmissions, including
eligible nonsubscription transmissions.1
In addition to expanding the section 114
license, the DMCA also created a
statutory license to allow a service to
make any necessary ephemeral
reproductions to facilitate the digital
transmission of the sound recording. 17
U.S.C. 112(e).
Licensees may operate under these
licenses provided they pay the royalty
fees and comply with the terms set by
the Copyright Royalty Judges (‘‘Judges’’).
On May 1, 2007, the Judges issued their
final determination setting rates and
terms for the section 112 and 114
licenses for the period 2006–2010. 72
FR 24084. As part of the terms set for
these licenses, the Judges designated
SoundExchange, Inc. as the organization
charged with collecting the royalty
payments and statements of account and
distributing the royalties to the
copyright owners and performers
entitled to receive such royalties under
the section 112 and 114 licenses. 37
CFR 380.4(b)(1). As the designated
Collective, SoundExchange may
conduct a single audit of a licensee for
1 An ‘‘eligible nonsubscription transmission’’ is a
noninteractive digital audio transmission which, as
the name implies, does not require a subscription
for receiving the transmission. The transmission
must also be made as a part of a service that
provides audio programming consisting in whole or
in part of performances of sound recordings the
primary purpose of which is to provide audio or
entertainment programming, but not to sell,
advertise, or promote particular goods or services
other than sound recordings, live concerts, or other
music-related events. 17 U.S.C. 114(j)(6).
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Nov 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
any calendar year for the purpose of
verifying their royalty payments.
SoundExchange must first file with the
Judges a notice of intent to audit a
licensee and serve the notice on the
licensee to be audited. 37 CFR 380.6(b),
(c).
On November 5, 2009, pursuant to 37
CFR 380.6(c), SoundExchange filed with
the Judges a notice of intent to audit
AOL LLC for the years 2006, 2007, and
2008. Section 380.6(c) requires the
Judges to publish a notice in the Federal
Register within 30 days of receipt of the
notice announcing the Collective’s
intent to conduct an audit.
In accordance with 37 CFR 380.6(c),
the Copyright Royalty Judges are
publishing today’s notice to fulfill this
requirement with respect to
SoundExchange’s notice of intent to
audit AOL LLC filed November 5, 2009.
Dated: November 17, 2009.
James Scott Sledge,
Chief, U.S. Copyright Royalty Judge.
[FR Doc. E9–27980 Filed 11–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1410–72–P
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND
SPACE ADMINISTRATION
[Notice: (09–100)]
Notice of Information Collection
AGENCY: National Aeronautics and
Space Administration (NASA).
ACTION: Notice of information collection.
SUMMARY: The National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, as part of its
continuing effort to reduce paperwork
and respondent burden, invites the
general public and other Federal
agencies to take this opportunity to
comment on proposed and/or
continuing information collections, as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13, 44 U.S.C.
3506(c)(2)(A)).
DATES: All comments should be
submitted within 60 calendar days from
the date of this publication.
ADDRESSES: All comments should be
addressed to Mrs. Lori Parker, National
Aeronautics and Space Administration,
Washington, DC 20546–0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Requests for additional information or
copies of the information collection
instrument(s) and instructions should
be directed to Mrs. Lori Parker, NASA
PRA Officer, NASA Headquarters, 300 E
Street, SW., JE000, Washington, DC
20546, (202) 358–1351, Lori.Parker1@nasa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61177
I. Abstract
The analysis of the Effective
Messaging Research survey will position
NASA to effectively communicate
Agency messages.
II. Method of Collection
All survey responses will be collected
by telephone and tabulated
electronically.
III. Data
Title: Effective Messaging Research.
OMB Number: 2700–0113.
Type of review: Extension of currently
approved collection.
Affected Public: Individuals and
households, Business or other for-profit,
not-for-profit institutions, Federal
Government, and State, Local or Tribal
Government.
Number of Respondents: 2,700.
Responses per Respondent: 1.
Annual Responses: 2,700.
Hours per Request: 0.33 hours.
Annual Burden Hours: 900.
IV. Request for Comments
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether
the proposed collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance
of the functions of NASA, including
whether the information collected has
practical utility; (2) the accuracy of
NASA’s estimate of the burden
(including hours and cost) of the
proposed collection of information; (3)
ways to enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (4) ways to minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on respondents, including automated
collection techniques or the use of other
forms of information technology.
Comments submitted in response to
this notice will be summarized and
included in the request for OMB
approval of this information collection.
They will also become a matter of
public record.
Lori Parker,
NASA PRA Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. E9–27970 Filed 11–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–445 and 50–446; NRC–
2009–0510]
Luminant Generation Company, LLC;
Comanche Peak Steam Electric
Station, Units 1 and 2; Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM
23NON1
61178
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 224 / Monday, November 23, 2009 / Notices
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
issuance of an amendment to Facility
Operating License Nos. NPF–87 and
NPF–89 in accordance with Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10
CFR), Section 50.90, issued to Luminant
Generation Company LLC (the licensee),
for operation of the Comanche Peak
Steam Electric Station (CPSES), Units 1
and 2, located in Somervell County,
Texas. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR
51.21, the NRC performed an
environmental assessment. Based on the
results of the environmental assessment,
the NRC is issuing a finding of no
significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would change
the legal name of the plant from
‘‘Comanche Peak Steam Electric
Station’’ to ‘‘Comanche Peak Nuclear
Power Plant.’’
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
February 11, 2009.
The proposed change also removes
the Table of Contents from the
Technical Specifications (TSs) and
places it under licensee control; deletes
TS 3.2.1.1, TS 3.2.3.1, TS 5.5.9.1, TS
5.6.10, and several footnotes from
Tables 3.3.1–1 and 3.3.2–1 and TS
3.4.10 since these TSs and footnotes are
no longer applicable to CPSES, Unit 1
or Unit 2 operation; renumbers TS
3.2.1.2 to TS 3.2.1, TS 3.2.3.2 to TS
3.2.3, and TS 5.5.9.2 to TS 5.5.9; deletes
several topical reports from the list of
approved analytical methods used to
determine core operating limits in TS
5.6.5; and corrects various minor
editorial errors in the TSs. However,
these amendments change a
requirement with respect to installation
or use of a facility component located
within the restricted area as defined in
10 CFR part 20. The NRC staff has
determined that these amendments
involve no significant increase in the
amounts, and no significant change in
the types, of any effluents that may be
released offsite, and that there is no
significant increase in individual or
cumulative occupational radiation
exposure. The Commission has
previously issued a proposed finding
that these amendments involve no
significant hazards consideration, and
there has been no public comment on
such finding published in the Federal
Register on April 7, 2009 (74 FR 15772).
Accordingly, these amendments meet
the eligibility criteria for categorical
exclusion set forth in 10 CFR
51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b),
no environmental impact statement or
environmental assessment need be
prepared in connection with the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:37 Nov 20, 2009
Jkt 220001
issuance of these amendments;
therefore, this environmental
assessment applies to only the plant
name change.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action is necessary to
reflect the legal change of name of the
plant from Comanche Peak Steam
Electric Station to Comanche Peak
Nuclear Power Plant.
Environmental Impacts of the
Proposed Action:
The NRC has concluded in its
evaluation of the proposed action that
since this action is for a plant name
change only that (1) there is a
reasonable assurance that the health and
safety of the public will not be
endangered by operation in the
proposed manner, (2) such activities
will be conducted in compliance with
the Commission’s regulations, and (3)
the issuance of the amendments will not
be inimical to the common defense and
security or to the health and safety of
the public.
The details of the staff’s safety
evaluation will be provided in the
license amendment that will be issued
as part of the letter to the licensee
approving the license amendment.
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 offsite. There is no
significant increase in the amount of
any effluent released offsite. There is no
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 any foreseeable
impacts to land, air, or water resources,
including impacts to biota. In addition,
there are also no known socioeconomic
or environmental justice impacts
associated with such proposed action. 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
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 CPSES,
Units 1 and 2, NUREG–0775, dated
September 1981 and Supplement dated
October 1989.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy,
on August 13, 2009, the staff consulted
with the Texas State official, Alice
Rogers, Inspection Unit Manager, Texas
Department of State Health Services,
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 letter
dated February 11, 2009. 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 O1 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day
of November 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mohan C. Thadani,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9–28090 Filed 11–20–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
E:\FR\FM\23NON1.SGM
23NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 224 (Monday, November 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61177-61178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-28090]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-445 and 50-446; NRC-2009-0510]
Luminant Generation Company, LLC; Comanche Peak Steam Electric
Station, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
[[Page 61178]]
issuance of an amendment to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-87 and
NPF-89 in accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR), Section 50.90, issued to Luminant Generation Company LLC (the
licensee), for operation of the Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station
(CPSES), Units 1 and 2, located in Somervell County, Texas. Therefore,
as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental
assessment. Based on the results of the environmental assessment, the
NRC is issuing a finding of no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action:
The proposed action would change the legal name of the plant from
``Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station'' to ``Comanche Peak Nuclear
Power Plant.''
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated February 11, 2009.
The proposed change also removes the Table of Contents from the
Technical Specifications (TSs) and places it under licensee control;
deletes TS 3.2.1.1, TS 3.2.3.1, TS 5.5.9.1, TS 5.6.10, and several
footnotes from Tables 3.3.1-1 and 3.3.2-1 and TS 3.4.10 since these TSs
and footnotes are no longer applicable to CPSES, Unit 1 or Unit 2
operation; renumbers TS 3.2.1.2 to TS 3.2.1, TS 3.2.3.2 to TS 3.2.3,
and TS 5.5.9.2 to TS 5.5.9; deletes several topical reports from the
list of approved analytical methods used to determine core operating
limits in TS 5.6.5; and corrects various minor editorial errors in the
TSs. However, these amendments change a requirement with respect to
installation or use of a facility component located within the
restricted area as defined in 10 CFR part 20. The NRC staff has
determined that these amendments involve no significant increase in the
amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that
may be released offsite, and that there is no significant increase in
individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. The
Commission has previously issued a proposed finding that these
amendments involve no significant hazards consideration, and there has
been no public comment on such finding published in the Federal
Register on April 7, 2009 (74 FR 15772). Accordingly, these amendments
meet the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10
CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact
statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection
with the issuance of these amendments; therefore, this environmental
assessment applies to only the plant name change.
The Need for the Proposed Action:
The proposed action is necessary to reflect the legal change of
name of the plant from Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station to Comanche
Peak Nuclear Power Plant.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:
The NRC has concluded in its evaluation of the proposed action that
since this action is for a plant name change only that (1) there is a
reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not
be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, (2) such activities
will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and
(3) the issuance of the amendments will not be inimical to the common
defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
The details of the staff's safety evaluation will be provided in
the license amendment that will be issued as part of the letter to the
licensee approving the license amendment.
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 offsite. There is no significant
increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. There is no
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 any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water
resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no
known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with
such proposed action. 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 CPSES, Units 1 and 2, NUREG-0775, dated September 1981 and
Supplement dated October 1989.
Agencies and Persons Consulted:
In accordance with its stated policy, on August 13, 2009, the staff
consulted with the Texas State official, Alice Rogers, Inspection Unit
Manager, Texas Department of State Health Services, 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 letter dated February 11, 2009. 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 O1 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 17th day of November 2009.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Mohan C. Thadani,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. E9-28090 Filed 11-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
