Tennessee Valley Authority; Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 3762-3763 [2010-1196]
Download as PDF
3762
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices
environmental impact statement for the
proposed action.
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated November 6, 2009, as
supplemented by letter dated November
20, 2009. Portions of the submittals
contain proprietary and security
information and, accordingly, are not
available to the public pursuant to 10
CFR 2.390. The public 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–1F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day
of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Donna N. Wright,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II–
1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–1182 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–327 and 50–328; NRC–
2010–0021]
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Tennessee Valley Authority; Sequoyah
Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2;
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 the
implementation date for certain new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73,
‘‘Physical protection of plants and
materials,’’ for Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR–77 and DPR–79,
issued to Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA, the licensee), for operation of the
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
(SQN), located in Hamilton County,
Tennessee. In accordance with 10 CFR
51.21, ‘‘Criteria for and identification of
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:43 Jan 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
licensing and regulatory actions
requiring environmental assessments,’’
the NRC prepared an environmental
assessment documenting its finding.
The NRC concluded that the proposed
action will have no significant
environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
the TVA from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for several new requirements of 10 CFR
part 73. Specifically, SQN would be
granted an exemption from being in full
compliance with certain new
requirements contained in 10 CFR
73.55, ‘‘Requirements for physical
protection of licensed activities in
nuclear power reactors against
radiological sabotage,’’ by the March 31,
2010, deadline (74 FR 13935, March 27,
2009). TVA has proposed an alternate
full compliance implementation date of
September 24, 2012, approximately two
and half years 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 SQN site
that were not previously considered in
the environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact made by
the Commission in promulgating its
revisions to 10 CFR part 73, Power
Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR
13926, 13967 (March 27, 2009).
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
November 6, 2009, as supplemented by
letter dated January 11, 2010.
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 SQN security system because they
involve new components and
engineering that cannot be obtained or
completed by the March 31, 2010,
implementation date.
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
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
beyond those previously analyzed in the
environmental assessment and finding
of no significant impact made by the
Commission in promulgating its
revisions to 10 CFR part 73 (74 FR
13967). There will be no change to
radioactive effluents that affect radiation
exposures to plant workers and
members of the public. 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 of the
plant, or to threatened, endangered, or
protected species under the Endangered
Species Act, or impacts to essential fish
habitat covered by the MagnusonSteven’s 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.
The licensee currently maintains a
security system acceptable to the NRC
and will continue to provide acceptable
physical protection of SQN as TVA
implements certain new requirements in
10 CFR part 73. Therefore, the extension
of the implementation date of the new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to
September 24, 2012, 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, if granted.
Environmental Impacts of the
Alternatives to the Proposed Action
As an alternative to the proposed
action, the NRC staff considered denial
of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the
exemption request would result in no
change in current environmental
impacts. If the proposed action was
denied, the licensee would have to
comply with the March 31, 2010,
implementation deadline. The
environmental impacts of the proposed
exemption and the ‘‘no action’’
alternative are similar.
E:\FR\FM\22JAN1.SGM
22JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 14 / Friday, January 22, 2010 / Notices
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of
any different resources than those
considered in the Final Environmental
Statement for SQN dated February 13,
1974.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on December 22, 2009, the NRC staff
consulted with the Tennessee State
official, Elizabeth Flannagan of the
Tennessee Bureau of Radiological
Health, regarding the environmental
impact of the proposed action. The State
official had no comments.
Finding of No Significant Impact
erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
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 November 6, 2009, as
supplemented by letter dated January
11, 2010. Portions of the November 6,
2009, submittal contain safeguards and
security sensitive 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, Public File Area O–1F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day
of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Siva P. Lingam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch
LPL2–2, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–1196 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
14:43 Jan 21, 2010
Jkt 220001
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
[OMB Control No. 3206–0174; Forms RI 20–
63, RI 20–116 and RI 20–117]
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Review of a Currently
Approved Information Collection
AGENCY: Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104–13, May 22, 1995), this notice
announces that the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) intends to submit to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) a request for review of a
currently approved information
collection. ‘‘Survivor Annuity Election
for a Spouse’’ (OMB Control No. 3206–
0174; Form RI 20–63), is used by
annuitants to elect a reduced annuity
with a survivor annuity for their spouse.
(OMB Control No. 3206–0174; Form RI
20–116) is a cover letter for RI 20–63
giving information about the cost to
elect less than the maximum survivor
annuity. This letter may be used to
decline to elect. (OMB Control No.
3206–0174; RI 20–117) is a cover letter
for RI 20–63 giving information about
the cost to elect the maximum survivor
annuity. This letter may be used to ask
for more information or to decline to
elect.
RI 20–117 is accompanied by RI 20–
63A, Information on Electing a Survivor
Annuity for Your Spouse, or RI 20–63B,
Information on Electing a Survivor
Annuity for Your Spouse When You Are
Providing a Former Spouse Annuity.
Both booklets explain the election. RI
20–63A is for annuitants who do not
have a former spouse who is entitled to
a survivor annuity benefit. RI 20–63B is
for those who do have a former spouse
who is entitled to a benefit. These
booklets do not require OMB clearance.
They have been included because they
provide the annuitant additional
information.
Comments are particularly invited on:
whether this collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of
functions of the Office of Personnel
Management, and whether it will have
practical utility; whether our estimate of
the public burden of this collection of
information is accurate, and based on
valid assumptions and methodology;
and ways in which we can minimize the
burden of the collection of information
on those who are to respond, through
the use of appropriate technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
3763
We estimate 2,400 RI 20–63 forms are
returned each year electing survivor
annuities and 200 annuitants return the
cover letter to ask for information about
the cost to elect less than the maximum
survivor annuity or to refuse to provide
any survivor benefit. We estimate this
form takes an average of 45 minutes per
response to complete the form with a
burden of 1,800 hours and 10 minutes
to complete the letter, which gives a
burden of 34 hours. The total burden for
RI 20–63 is 1,834 hours.
For copies of this proposal, contact
Cyrus S. Benson on (202) 606–4808,
FAX (202) 606–0910 or via E-mail to
Cyrus.Benson@opm.gov. Please include
a mailing address with your request.
DATES: Comments on this proposal
should be received within 60 calendar
days from the date of this publication.
ADDRESSES: Send or deliver comments
to James K. Freiert, Deputy Assistant
Director, Retirement Services Program,
Center for Retirement and Insurance
Services, U.S. Office of Personnel
Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Room
3305, Washington, DC 20415–3500.
For information regarding
administrative coordination contact:
Cyrus S. Benson, Team Leader,
Publications Team, RIS Support
Services/Support Group, U.S. Office of
Personnel Management, 1900 E Street,
NW., Room 4H28, Washington, DC
20415.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
John Berry,
Director.
[FR Doc. 2010–1112 Filed 1–21–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6325–38–P
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request for Extension of a Currently
Approved Information Collection:
(OMB Control No. 3206–0211;
Reemployment of Annuitants, 5 CFR
837.103)
AGENCY: Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Notice.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub.
L. 104–13, May 22, 1995), this notice
announces that the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) intends to submit to
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) a request for extension of a
currently approved information
collection. ‘‘Reemployment of
Annuitants’’ (OMB Control No. 3206–
0211; 5 CFR 837.103), requires agencies
E:\FR\FM\22JAN1.SGM
22JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 14 (Friday, January 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3762-3763]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-1196]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-327 and 50-328; NRC-2010-0021]
Tennessee Valley Authority; Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and
2; 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 the
implementation date for certain new requirements of 10 CFR part 73,
``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR-77 and DPR-79, issued to Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA, the licensee), for operation of the Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units
1 and 2 (SQN), located in Hamilton County, Tennessee. In accordance
with 10 CFR 51.21, ``Criteria for and identification of licensing and
regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,'' the NRC
prepared an environmental assessment documenting its finding. The NRC
concluded that the proposed action will have no significant
environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt the TVA from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for several new requirements of
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, SQN would be granted an exemption from
being in full compliance with certain new requirements contained in 10
CFR 73.55, ``Requirements for physical protection of licensed
activities in nuclear power reactors against radiological sabotage,''
by the March 31, 2010, deadline (74 FR 13935, March 27, 2009). TVA has
proposed an alternate full compliance implementation date of September
24, 2012, approximately two and half years 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 SQN site that
were not previously considered in the environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact made by the Commission in promulgating
its revisions to 10 CFR part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements,
74 FR 13926, 13967 (March 27, 2009).
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated November 6, 2009, as supplemented by letter dated
January 11, 2010.
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 SQN security
system because they involve new components and engineering that cannot
be obtained or completed by the March 31, 2010, implementation date.
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 in the environmental assessment
and finding of no significant impact made by the Commission in
promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73 (74 FR 13967). There will
be no change to radioactive effluents that affect radiation exposures
to plant workers and members of the public. 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 of the plant, or to threatened,
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Steven's 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.
The licensee currently maintains a security system acceptable to
the NRC and will continue to provide acceptable physical protection of
SQN as TVA implements certain new requirements in 10 CFR part 73.
Therefore, the extension of the implementation date of the new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73 to September 24, 2012, 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, if granted.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives 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 request would result in no change in current
environmental impacts. If the proposed action was denied, the licensee
would have to comply with the March 31, 2010, implementation deadline.
The environmental impacts of the proposed exemption and the ``no
action'' alternative are similar.
[[Page 3763]]
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those considered in the Final Environmental Statement for SQN dated
February 13, 1974.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on December 22, 2009, the NRC
staff consulted with the Tennessee State official, Elizabeth Flannagan
of the Tennessee Bureau of Radiological 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 letter dated November 6, 2009, as supplemented by letter
dated January 11, 2010. Portions of the November 6, 2009, submittal
contain safeguards and security sensitive 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, Public File Area O-1F21, 11555
Rockville Pike (first floor), 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day of January 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Siva P. Lingam,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch LPL2-2, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-1196 Filed 1-21-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P