Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 14639-14640 [2010-6726]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on February 24, 2009, the staff
consulted with the Ohio State official,
Ms. Carol O’Claire of the Ohio
Emergency Management Agency,
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 30, 2009, as
supplemented on December 23, 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, Room 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 18th 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.
[FR Doc. 2010–6751 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
[Docket Nos. 50–003, 50–247, and 50–286;
NRC–2010–0137]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.;
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit
Nos. 1, 2, and 3; 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
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
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–5, DPR–26,
and DPR–64, issued to Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for
operation of Indian Point Nuclear
Generating Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (IP1,
IP2, and IP3), located in Westchester
County, NY. In accordance with 10 CFR
51.21, the NRC prepared an
environmental assessment documenting
its finding. The NRC concluded that the
proposed actions will have no
significant environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
IP1, IP2, and IP3 from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for several new requirements of 10 CFR
part 73. Specifically, IP1, IP2, and IP3
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.
The licensee has proposed an alternate
full compliance implementation date of
February 17, 2011, approximately 11
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 IP1, IP2,
and IP3 site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
January 28, 2010, as supplemented by
letter dated March 8, 2010.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to
provide the licensee with additional
time for design, procurement, and
installation activities and in
consideration of impediments to
construction such as winter weather
conditions and equipment delivery
schedules.
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.
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14639
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 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 (see Part 73,
Power Reactor Security Requirements,
74 FR 13926 (March 27, 2009)).
IP1, IP2, and IP3’s current security
program and the new requirements that
will be implemented by March 31, 2010,
will provide continued assurance of
public health and safety and common
defense and security in lieu of the full
compliance with all the requirements
specified in 10 CFR part 73. Therefore,
the extension of the implementation
date of some of the new requirements of
10 CFR part 73 to February 17, 2011,
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.
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
14640
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / 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
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 (1) The ‘‘Indian Point Unit
No. 1, Environmental Report and
Benefit Cost Analysis,’’ June 1973; (2)
The ‘‘Final Environmental Statement
Related to Operation of Indian Point
Generating Plant Unit No. 2,’’ dated
September 1972, and (3) the ‘‘Final
Environmental Statement Related to
Operation of Indian Point Generating
Plant Unit No. 3,’’ dated February 1975.
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on March 4, 2010, the NRC staff
consulted with the New York State
official, Alyse Peterson, of the New York
State Energy Research and Development
Authority, 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 28, 2010. Portions of the
submittal dated January 28, 2010,
contain security-related information
and, accordingly, are withheld from
public disclosure in accordance with 10
CFR 2.390(d)(1). The licensee’s
supplemental letter dated March 8,
2010, is withheld in its entirety as
security-related information in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.390(d)(1). A
publicly available version of the letter
dated January 28, 2010, is accessible
electronically from the Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) with Accession No.
ML100340142. The publicly available
version of the document may be
examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
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
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 19th day
of March 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John P. Boska,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch I–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–6726 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–397; NRC–2010–0084]
Energy Northwest Columbia
Generating Station; Exemption
1.0 Background
Energy Northwest (the licensee) is the
holder of Facility Operating License No.
NPF–21 which authorizes operation of
the Columbia Generating Station (CGS).
The license provides, among other
things, that the facility is subject to the
rules, regulations, and orders of the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC,
the Commission) now or hereafter in
effect.
The facility consists of a boiling-water
reactor located in Benton County,
Washington.
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), Part 73, ‘‘Physical
protection of plants and materials,’’
Section 73.55, ‘‘Requirements for
physical protection of licensed activities
in nuclear power reactors against
radiological sabotage,’’ published in the
Federal Register on March 27, 2009,
effective May 26, 2009, with a full
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
requires licensees to protect, with high
assurance, against radiological sabotage
by designing and implementing
comprehensive site security programs.
The amendments to 10 CFR 73.55
published on March 27, 2009 (74 FR
PO 00000
Frm 00086
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
13926), establish and update generically
applicable security requirements similar
to those previously imposed by
Commission orders issued after the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,
and implemented by licensees. In
addition, the amendments to 10 CFR
73.55 include additional requirements
to further enhance site security based
upon insights gained from
implementation of the post-September
11, 2001, security orders. It is from one
of these additional requirements that the
licensee now seeks an exemption from
the March 31, 2010, implementation
date. All other physical security
requirements established by this recent
rulemaking have already been or will be
implemented by the licensee by March
31, 2010.
By application dated January 27,
2010, the licensee requested an
exemption in accordance with 10 CFR
73.5, ‘‘Specific exemptions.’’ Attachment
1 to the licensee’s letter contains
security-related information and,
accordingly, those portions of the letters
are being withheld from public
disclosure. A redacted version of the
licensee’s exemption request dated
January 27, 2010, is publicly available
in the Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML100481052. The
licensee has requested an exemption
from the March 31, 2010, compliance
date stating that it must accommodate a
potential manufacturing delay that
would result in a non-compliance of the
new security requirements. Specifically,
the request is to extend the
implementation date from the current
March 31, 2010, deadline to May 15,
2010. Granting this exemption for the
one item would afford the licensee
additional time to perform necessary
upgrades to meet or exceed the
regulatory requirements.
3.0 Discussion of Part 73 Schedule
Exemptions from the March 31, 2010,
Full Implementation Date
Pursuant to 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), ‘‘By
March 31, 2010, each nuclear power
reactor licensee, licensed under 10 CFR
part 50, shall implement the
requirements of this section through its
Commission-approved Physical Security
Plan, Training and Qualification Plan,
Safeguards Contingency Plan, and Cyber
Security Plan referred to collectively
hereafter as ‘security plans.’ ’’ Pursuant
to 10 CFR 73.5, the Commission may,
upon application by any interested
person or upon its own initiative, grant
exemptions from the requirements of 10
CFR part 73 when the exemptions are
authorized by law, and will not
endanger life or property or the common
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 58 (Friday, March 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14639-14640]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6726]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-003, 50-247, and 50-286; NRC-2010-0137]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Indian Point Nuclear Generating
Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3; 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-5, DPR-26, and DPR-64, issued to Entergy Nuclear
Operations, Inc. (the licensee), for operation of Indian Point Nuclear
Generating Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (IP1, IP2, and IP3), located in
Westchester County, NY. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC
prepared an environmental assessment documenting its finding. The NRC
concluded that the proposed actions will have no significant
environmental impact.
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt IP1, IP2, and IP3 from the
required implementation date of March 31, 2010, for several new
requirements of 10 CFR part 73. Specifically, IP1, IP2, and IP3 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.
The licensee has proposed an alternate full compliance implementation
date of February 17, 2011, approximately 11 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 IP1,
IP2, and IP3 site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated January 28, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated
March 8, 2010.
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed to provide the licensee with
additional time for design, procurement, and installation activities
and in consideration of impediments to construction such as winter
weather conditions and equipment delivery schedules.
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-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 (see Part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements,
74 FR 13926 (March 27, 2009)).
IP1, IP2, and IP3's current security program and the new
requirements that will be implemented by March 31, 2010, will provide
continued assurance of public health and safety and common defense and
security in lieu of the full compliance with all the requirements
specified in 10 CFR part 73. Therefore, the extension of the
implementation date of some of the new requirements of 10 CFR part 73
to February 17, 2011, 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.
[[Page 14640]]
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.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those considered in (1) The ``Indian Point Unit No. 1, Environmental
Report and Benefit Cost Analysis,'' June 1973; (2) The ``Final
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Indian Point Generating
Plant Unit No. 2,'' dated September 1972, and (3) the ``Final
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Indian Point Generating
Plant Unit No. 3,'' dated February 1975.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on March 4, 2010, the NRC
staff consulted with the New York State official, Alyse Peterson, of
the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, 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 28, 2010. Portions of the submittal
dated January 28, 2010, contain security-related information and,
accordingly, are withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10
CFR 2.390(d)(1). The licensee's supplemental letter dated March 8,
2010, is withheld in its entirety as security-related information in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.390(d)(1). A publicly available version of the
letter dated January 28, 2010, is accessible electronically from the
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) with
Accession No. ML100340142. The publicly available version 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, Public File Area
O-1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852.
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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of March 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John P. Boska,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-6726 Filed 3-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
