In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Operations; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; Demand for Information, 10833-10834 [2010-4934]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 45 / Tuesday, March 9, 2010 / Notices
components will continue to be
maintained through the facility’s
compliance with 10 CFR 50.55a.
Date of issuance: February 24, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance and shall be implemented
within 180 days of issuance.
Amendment Nos.: 199 and 160.
Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–
39 and NPF–85. These amendments
revised the license and the technical
specifications.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: April 21, 2009 (74 FR 18254).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendments is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated February 24,
2010.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Docket Nos. 50–30, and
50–185. Erie County, Ohio
Date of amendment request: January
9, 2009, as supplemented by letter dated
October 6, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment adds a condition to each
license requiring that the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
assess the residual radioactivity and
demonstrate that the stream bed and
banks of Plum Brook between the Plum
Brook Station boundary and Sandusky
Bay meet the radiological criteria for
unrestricted use specified in 10 CFR
20.1402 prior to terminating Licenses
TR–3 and R–93.
Date of issuance: February 1, 2010.
Effective date: February 1, 2010.
Amendment Nos.: 14 and 10,
respectively.
Possession Only License Nos. TR–3
and R–93: The amendment revises both
licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: May 5, 2009 (74 FR 20751).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation Report, dated
February 1, 2010.
No Significant Hazards Consideration
Comments Received: No.
sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, Docket Nos. 50–30, and
50–185. Erie County, Ohio (TAC NO.
J00301)
Date of amendment request: January
9, 2009, as supplemented by letter dated
October 6, 2009.
Brief description of amendment: The
amendment adds a condition to each
license requiring that the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration
assess the residual radioactivity and
demonstrate that the stream bed and
banks of Plum Brook between the Plum
VerDate Nov<24>2008
19:04 Mar 08, 2010
Jkt 220001
10833
Brook Station boundary and Sandusky
Bay meet the radiological criteria for
unrestricted use specified in 10 CFR
20.1402 prior to terminating Licenses
TR–3 and R–93.
Date of issuance: February 1, 2010.
Effective date: February 1, 2010.
Amendment Nos.: 14 and 10,
respectively
Possession Only License Nos. TR–3
and R–93: The amendment revises both
licenses.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: May 5, 2009 (74 FR 20751)
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendment is contained in a
Safety Evaluation Report, dated
February 1, 2010.
No Significant Hazards Consideration
Comments Received: No.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
PSEG Nuclear LLC, Docket Nos. 50–272
and 50–311, Salem Nuclear Generating
Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2, Salem
County, New Jersey
The NRC has been monitoring the
activities between Entergy and the State
of Vermont regarding the veracity of
statements made by Entergy officials
and staff to the State related to
underground piping at Vermont Yankee.
On February 24, 2010, Entergy verbally
informed the NRC of actions that
Entergy has taken regarding certain
employees, including some who were
removed from their site positions at
Vermont Yankee and placed on
administrative leave, as a result of its
independent internal investigation into
alleged contradictory or misleading
information provided to the State of
Vermont that was not corrected. While
the NRC does not have jurisdiction over
the communications between Entergy
and the State of Vermont, the NRC is
aware that some of these individuals
have responsibilities that involve
decision-making communications
material to the NRC and/or involve
NRC-regulated activities, such as
Regulatory Licensing, Security, and
Emergency Preparedness Programs.
Date of application for amendments:
April 9, 2009.
Brief description of amendments: The
amendments relocate Technical
Specification (TS) requirements
pertaining to communications during
refueling operations (TS 3/4.9.5),
manipulator crane operability (TS 3/
4.9.6), and crane travel (TS 3/4.9.7) to
the Technical Requirements Manual.
Date of issuance: February 17, 2010.
Effective date: As of the date of
issuance, to be implemented within 60
days.
Amendment Nos.: 293 and 277.
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–
70 and DPR–75: The amendments
revised the TSs and the License.
Date of initial notice in Federal
Register: August 25, 2009 (74 FR
42929).
The Commission’s related evaluation
of the amendments is contained in a
Safety Evaluation dated February 17,
2010.
No significant hazards consideration
comments received: No.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 25th day
of February 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Allen G. Howe,
Deputy Director, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–4523 Filed 3–8–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[Docket No. 05000271; License No. DPR–
28; EA–10–034; NRC–2010–0089]
In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear
Operations; Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Station; Demand for Information
I
Entergy Nuclear Operations (Entergy)
is the holder of Facility Operating
License No. DPR–28, issued by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50 on February
28, 1973. The license authorizes the
operation of the Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station (Vermont
Yankee) in accordance with conditions
specified therein. The facility is located
in Vernon, Vermont.
II
III
The NRC relies on licensees to
provide complete and accurate
information in order to make certain
licensing and oversight decisions, as
required by Title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (CFR) 50.9. To date,
the NRC has not identified any
instances in which Entergy staff or
officials have provided incomplete or
inaccurate information to the NRC.
However, in light of the above, the NRC
requires additional information from
Entergy to confirm that information
provided by these individuals is
accurate and the impact of the
organizational changes is assessed in the
E:\FR\FM\09MRN1.SGM
09MRN1
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
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 45 (Tuesday, March 9, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10833-10834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4934]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 05000271; License No. DPR-28; EA-10-034; NRC-2010-0089]
In the Matter of Entergy Nuclear Operations; Vermont Yankee
Nuclear Power Station; Demand for Information
I
Entergy Nuclear Operations (Entergy) is the holder of Facility
Operating License No. DPR-28, issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50 on February 28, 1973. The
license authorizes the operation of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station (Vermont Yankee) in accordance with conditions specified
therein. The facility is located in Vernon, Vermont.
II
The NRC has been monitoring the activities between Entergy and the
State of Vermont regarding the veracity of statements made by Entergy
officials and staff to the State related to underground piping at
Vermont Yankee. On February 24, 2010, Entergy verbally informed the NRC
of actions that Entergy has taken regarding certain employees,
including some who were removed from their site positions at Vermont
Yankee and placed on administrative leave, as a result of its
independent internal investigation into alleged contradictory or
misleading information provided to the State of Vermont that was not
corrected. While the NRC does not have jurisdiction over the
communications between Entergy and the State of Vermont, the NRC is
aware that some of these individuals have responsibilities that involve
decision-making communications material to the NRC and/or involve NRC-
regulated activities, such as Regulatory Licensing, Security, and
Emergency Preparedness Programs.
III
The NRC relies on licensees to provide complete and accurate
information in order to make certain licensing and oversight decisions,
as required by Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 50.9.
To date, the NRC has not identified any instances in which Entergy
staff or officials have provided incomplete or inaccurate information
to the NRC. However, in light of the above, the NRC requires additional
information from Entergy to confirm that information provided by these
individuals is accurate and the impact of the organizational changes is
assessed in the
[[Page 10834]]
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 NRC-regulated 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
NRC-regulated 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 NRC-regulated programs
(e.g., Regulatory 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
