Energy Northwest; Columbia Generating Station; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 10834-10835 [2010-4676]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
10834
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 9, 2010 / Notices
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
areas of regulatory program performance
and safety culture. In addition, Entergy
has not provided the NRC with
information describing how the recent
personnel changes resulting from the
independent internal investigation will
affect Entergy’s ability to implement
NRC-regulated programs at Vermont
Yankee, and any compensatory
measures Entergy has taken in response.
The NRC will independently review and
assess the results of Entergy’s
independent investigation, and
determine any implications on NRCregulated activities at the facility.
IV
Accordingly, pursuant to sections
161c, 161o, 182 and 186 of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and
the Commission’s regulations in 10 CFR
2.204 and 10 CFR 50.54(f), in order for
the Commission to determine whether
Vermont Yankee’s license should be
modified, suspended, or revoked, or
other enforcement action taken to
ensure compliance with NRC regulatory
requirements, Entergy is required to
submit to the Regional Administrator,
NRC Region I, 475 Allendale Road, King
of Prussia, PA, 19406 (with copies to the
Director, Office of Enforcement and to
the Assistant General Counsel for
Materials Litigation and Enforcement,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001), within 30
days of the date of this Demand for
Information, the following information,
in writing, and under oath or
affirmation:
1. Information regarding whether
communications over the past five years
to the NRC by the aforementioned
employees that were material to NRCregulated activities were complete and
accurate, and the basis for that
conclusion. The communications shall
include, but not be limited to, required
reports to the NRC, interactions with
NRC inspection staff, and submittals to
support NRC licensing decisions,
including the license renewal process.
The information shall also describe any
impacts on safety and security for any
communications to the NRC found to be
incomplete or inaccurate.
2. Any corrective actions or
compensatory measures taken or
planned to address any incomplete or
inaccurate communications provided to
the NRC by the aforementioned
employees identified by your review
conducted in response to Item 1.
3. A description of how, in light of the
organizational changes made in
response to the independent internal
investigation, Entergy is providing for
appropriate implementation of NRCregulated programs (e.g., Regulatory
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:04 Mar 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
Licensing, Security, Emergency
Preparedness, etc.)
4. A description of how Entergy is
identifying and responding to any
adverse implications to the Vermont
Yankee site safety culture as a result of
this investigation, its findings, and the
actions taken regarding the
aforementioned employees.
5. Confirmation that Entergy intends
to make the independent internal
investigation available to the NRC to
allow the NRC to independently
evaluate Entergy’s investigation for any
impact on NRC-regulated activities.
The Director, Office of Enforcement,
may relax or rescind any of these items
for good cause shown.
V
After reviewing your response, the
NRC will determine whether further
action is necessary to ensure
compliance with regulatory
requirements.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day
of March, 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2010–4934 Filed 3–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–397; NRC–2010–0084]
Energy Northwest; Columbia
Generating Station; 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 one new
requirement of 10 CFR part 73,
‘‘Physical protection of plants and
materials,’’ for Facility Operating
License No. DPR–46, issued to Energy
Northwest (the licensee), for operation
of the Columbia Generating Station
(CGS), located in Benton County,
Washington. 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 exempt
Energy Northwest from the required
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for one new requirement of 10 CFR part
73. Specifically, Energy Northwest
would be granted an exemption from
being in full compliance with a new
requirement contained in 10 CFR 73.55
by the March 31, 2010, deadline. Energy
Northwest has proposed an alternate
full compliance implementation date of
May 15, 2010, 45 days beyond the date
required by 10 CFR part 73. The
proposed action, an extension of the
schedule for completion of one action
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
Energy Northwest site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
January 27, 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 Energy Northwest security system
due to manufacturing delays of one item
at the vendor.
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 as discussed
in a Federal Register notice dated
March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). 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-
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 9, 2010 / Notices
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. In addition, in promulgating its
revisions to 10 CFR part 73, the
Commission prepared an environmental
assessment and published a finding of
no significant impact [Part 73, Power
Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR
13926 (March 27, 2009)].
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
actions, 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.
dated January 27, 2010. Portions of the
document contain security-related
information and, accordingly, are not
available to the public. Other parts of
the document may be examined, and/or
copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR), located at One
White Flint North, Room O–1 F21,
11555 Rockville Pike (first floor),
Rockville, Maryland 20852. 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 25th day
of February 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lynnea E. Wilkins,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–4676 Filed 3–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–285; NRC–2010–0087]
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on February 1, 2010, the NRC staff
consulted with the Washington State
official, Mr. R. Cowley of the Office of
Radiation Protection, regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official had no
comments.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with 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 CGS dated December
1981.
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 Renewed Facility
Operating License No. DPR–40, issued
to Omaha Public Power District (OPPD,
the licensee), for operation of Fort
Calhoun Station, Unit 1 (FCS), located
in Washington County, Nebraska.
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.
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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:04 Mar 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
Omaha Public Power District, Fort
Calhoun Station, Unit 1, Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10835
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
FCS from the required implementation
date of March 31, 2010, for several new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73.
Specifically, FCS 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. OPPD
has proposed an alternate full
compliance implementation date of
October 5, 2011, approximately 19
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 FCS site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
December 31, 2009, as supplemented by
letter dated January 21, 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 FCS security system due to the time
required for significant design,
procurement, and installation activities
needed to implement the required
upgrades.
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 as discussed
in a Federal Register notice dated
March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). 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.
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10834-10835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4676]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-397; NRC-2010-0084]
Energy Northwest; Columbia Generating Station; 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 one new requirement of 10 CFR part 73,
``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Facility Operating
License No. DPR-46, issued to Energy Northwest (the licensee), for
operation of the Columbia Generating Station (CGS), located in Benton
County, Washington. 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 exempt Energy Northwest from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for one new requirement of 10
CFR part 73. Specifically, Energy Northwest would be granted an
exemption from being in full compliance with a new requirement
contained in 10 CFR 73.55 by the March 31, 2010, deadline. Energy
Northwest has proposed an alternate full compliance implementation date
of May 15, 2010, 45 days beyond the date required by 10 CFR part 73.
The proposed action, an extension of the schedule for completion of one
action 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 Energy Northwest site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated January 27, 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 Energy
Northwest security system due to manufacturing delays of one item at
the vendor.
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 as discussed in a Federal
Register notice dated March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). 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-
[[Page 10835]]
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. In addition,
in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73, the Commission
prepared an environmental assessment and published a finding of no
significant impact [Part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR
13926 (March 27, 2009)].
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 actions, 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.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those considered in the Final Environmental Statement for CGS dated
December 1981.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on February 1, 2010, the NRC
staff consulted with the Washington State official, Mr. R. Cowley of
the Office of Radiation Protection, 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 January 27, 2010. Portions of the document
contain security-related information and, accordingly, are not
available to the public. Other parts of the document may be examined,
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR),
located at One White Flint North, Room O-1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike
(first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 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 25th day of February 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Lynnea E. Wilkins,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-4676 Filed 3-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
