Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 12311-12312 [2010-5562]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Notices
number. This action is necessary to
correct the docket number.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Mahoney, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001; telephone (301) 415–
3867, e-mail michael.mahoney@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On page
7628, in the 3rd column under Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, first line, it is
corrected to read from ‘‘Docket No. 50–
341’’ to ‘‘Docket No. 50–346.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board,
Telephone: 703–518–6304.
Mary Rupp,
Board Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–5709 Filed 3–11–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
Notice of Permits Issued Under the
Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978
National Science Foundation.
ACTION: Notice of permits issued under
the Antarctic Conservation of 1978,
Public Law 95–541.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The National Science
Foundation (NSF) is required to publish
notice of permits issued under the
Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978.
This is the required notice.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Office,
Office of Polar Programs, Rm. 755,
National Science Foundation, 4201
Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 8, 2010, the National Science
Foundation published a notice in the
Federal Register of permit applications
received. A permit was issued on March
10, 2020 to: H. William Detrich, III,
Permit No. 2010–023.
Nadene G. Kennedy,
Permit Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010–5579 Filed 3–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–346]
FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating
Company; Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing; Correction
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of Consideration of
Issuance of Amendment to Facility
Operating License, Proposed No
Significant Hazards Consideration
Determination, and Opportunity for a
Hearing; Correction.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This document corrects a
notice appearing in the Federal Register
on February 22, 2010 (75 FR 7628),
which incorrectly stated a docket
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:34 Mar 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
12311
September 20, 2010, approximately 51⁄2
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, water, or
land at the Vermont Yankee site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
January 21, 2010, as supplemented by
letter dated February 17, 2010.
Dated in Rockville, Maryland, this 5th day
of March 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael Mahoney,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III–
2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
The Need for the Proposed Action
[FR Doc. 2010–5559 Filed 3–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–271; NRC–2010–0100]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc;
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
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 certain new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73,
‘‘Physical protection of plants and
materials,’’ for Facility Operating
License No. DPR–28, issued to Entergy
Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the
licensee), for operation of Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Station (Vermont
Yankee), located in Windham County,
Vermont. Therefore, as required by 10
CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared an
environmental assessment documenting
its finding. The NRC concluded that the
proposed actions will have no
significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
Vermont Yankee from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for several new requirements of 10 CFR
part 73. Specifically, Vermont Yankee
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.
Entergy has proposed an alternate full
compliance implementation date of
PO 00000
Frm 00141
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The proposed action is needed to
provide the licensee with additional
time to perform the required upgrades to
the Vermont Yankee security system
due to resource and logistical impacts
and other factors.
The licensee has requested a
scheduler exemption to the compliance
date identified in 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1) to
implement the specific requirements
stated in 10 CFR 73.55(e)(7)(i)(B) and 10
CFR 73.55(i)(4)(i) for Vermont Yankee.
The request for an exemption from
March 31, 2010, implementation date to
September 20, 2010, is based on
completion of installation as well as
testing and training of security
personnel on the new features. This
exemption will provide Vermont
Yankee sufficient time for installation,
testing, and training activities to be
completed, considering initial permit
delays, inclement winter weather
construction delays and procurement
delays.
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 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.
E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM
15MRN1
12312
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 49 / Monday, March 15, 2010 / Notices
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. 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, 13967 (March 27, 2009)].
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 Vermont Yankee 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
September 20, 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, if granted.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
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
application 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 action and the alternative
action are similar.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:34 Mar 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
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 Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Docket
No. 50–271, dated July 1972, as
supplemented through the ‘‘Generic
Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants:
Regarding Vermont Yankee Nuclear
Power Station,’’ published in August
2007. Final Report (NUREG—1437,
Supplement 30).’’
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th the
day of March 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Kim,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I–
1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on February 24, 2010, the NRC staff
consulted with the Vermont State
official of the Vermont Department of
Public Service regarding the
environmental impact of the proposed
action. The State official had no
comments.
South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company; Virgil C. Summer Nuclear
Station, Unit 1; Exemption
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 21, 2010, as
supplemented by letter dated February
17, 2010. Portions of the submittal dated
January 21, 2010, as supplemented by
letter dated February 17, 2010, contain
security related sensitive information
and, accordingly, are withheld from
public disclosure in accordance with 10
CFR 2.390. Publicly available versions
of this document are accessible
electronically from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) with Accession Nos.
ML100270294 and ML100100541743,
respectively.
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 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@nrc.gov.
PO 00000
Frm 00142
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
[FR Doc. 2010–5562 Filed 3–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No 50–395; NRC–2010–0077]
1.0 Background
The South Carolina Electric and Gas
Company (SCE&G, the licensee) is the
holder of Facility Operating License No.
NPF–12 which authorizes operation of
the Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station,
Unit 1 (VCSNS). The license provides,
among other things, that the facility is
subject to all rules, regulations, and
orders of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC, the Commission)
now or hereafter in effect.
The facility consists of a pressurizedwater reactor located in Fairfield County
in South Carolina.
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.46,
‘‘Acceptance criteria for emergency core
cooling systems for light-water nuclear
power reactors,’’ requires, among other
items, that:
Each boiling or pressurized light-water
nuclear power reactor fueled with uranium
oxide pellets within cylindrical zircaloy or
ZIRLO cladding must be provided with an
emergency core cooling system (ECCS) that
must be designed so that its calculated
cooling performance following postulated
loss-of-coolant accidents [LOCAs] conforms
to the criteria set forth in paragraph (b) of this
section.
Appendix K to 10 CFR part 50, ‘‘ECCS
Evaluation Models,’’ requires, among
other items, that the rate of energy
release, hydrogen generation, and
cladding oxidation from the metal/water
reaction shall be calculated using the
Baker-Just equation. The regulations of
10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR part 50,
Appendix K, make no provision for use
of fuel rods clad in a material other than
zircaloy or ZIRLOTM. Since the chemical
composition of the Optimized ZIRLOTM
alloy differs from the specifications for
zircaloy or ZIRLOTM, a plant-specific
exemption is required to allow the use
of the Optimized ZIRLOTM alloy as a
cladding material at VCSNS. Therefore,
E:\FR\FM\15MRN1.SGM
15MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 49 (Monday, March 15, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12311-12312]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-5562]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-271; NRC-2010-0100]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
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 certain new requirements of 10 CFR part 73,
``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Facility Operating
License No. DPR-28, issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy
or the licensee), for operation of Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station
(Vermont Yankee), located in Windham County, Vermont. Therefore, as
required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared an environmental assessment
documenting its finding. The NRC concluded that the proposed actions
will have no significant impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt Vermont Yankee from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for several new requirements of
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, Vermont Yankee 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. Entergy has
proposed an alternate full compliance implementation date of September
20, 2010, approximately 5\1/2\ 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, water, or land at the Vermont Yankee site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated January 21, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated
February 17, 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 Vermont Yankee
security system due to resource and logistical impacts and other
factors.
The licensee has requested a scheduler exemption to the compliance
date identified in 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1) to implement the specific
requirements stated in 10 CFR 73.55(e)(7)(i)(B) and 10 CFR
73.55(i)(4)(i) for Vermont Yankee. The request for an exemption from
March 31, 2010, implementation date to September 20, 2010, is based on
completion of installation as well as testing and training of security
personnel on the new features. This exemption will provide Vermont
Yankee sufficient time for installation, testing, and training
activities to be completed, considering initial permit delays,
inclement winter weather construction delays and procurement delays.
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 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.
[[Page 12312]]
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. 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, 13967 (March 27, 2009)].
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 Vermont Yankee 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
September 20, 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, 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 application 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 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
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Docket No. 50-271, dated July
1972, as supplemented through the ``Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Regarding Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Station,'' published in August 2007. Final Report
(NUREG--1437, Supplement 30).''
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on February 24, 2010, the NRC
staff consulted with the Vermont State official of the Vermont
Department of Public Service 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 21, 2010, as supplemented by letter
dated February 17, 2010. Portions of the submittal dated January 21,
2010, as supplemented by letter dated February 17, 2010, contain
security related sensitive information and, accordingly, are withheld
from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390. Publicly
available versions of this document are accessible electronically from
the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) with
Accession Nos. ML100270294 and ML100100541743, respectively.
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 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@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th the day of March 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Kim,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-5562 Filed 3-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
