FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Perry Nuclear Power Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 14638-14639 [2010-6751]

Download as PDF 14638 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices versions of the licensee’s letter dated January 21, 2010, and the letter dated March 2, 2010, are accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) with Accession Nos. ML100270022 and ML100680660, respectively. Publicly available versions of the 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 O–1 F21, 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: http://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. issuing a finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action [FR Doc. 2010–6760 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am] The proposed action would exempt the PNPP from the required implementation date of March 31, 2010, for a certain new requirement of 10 CFR part 73. Specifically, PNPP 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. FENOC has proposed an alternate full compliance date of November 25, 2010, approximately 8 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 PNPP site. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated November 30, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML093370151, not publically available, contains security-related information), as supplemented on December 23, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093650293, not publically available, contains security-related information). BILLING CODE 7590–01–P The Need for the Proposed Action Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of March 2010. For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Bhalchandra K. Vaidya, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I–1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–440; NRC–2010–0124] emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Perry Nuclear Power Plant; 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. NPF–58, issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC, the licensee), for operation of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 (PNPP), located in Ottawa County, Ohio. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental assessment. Based on the results of this environmental assessment, the NRC is VerDate Nov<24>2008 15:23 Mar 25, 2010 Jkt 220001 The proposed action is needed to provide the licensee with additional time to perform to design the necessary modifications, procure equipment and material, and implement upgrades to comply with a specific aspect of 10 CFR 73.55. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its evaluation 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 details of the 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. The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the environment assessment and finding of no significant impact made by the Commission in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73 as discussed PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 in a Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13967). There will be no change to radioactive effluents that effect 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 environment assessment and published a finding of no significant impact (part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR 13926, 13967 (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 action, the 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 ‘‘no-action’’ 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, NUREG–0884 dated August 1982, for the PNPP. E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM 26MRN1 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, http:// 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

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 58 (Friday, March 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14638-14639]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6751]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-440; NRC-2010-0124]


FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company; Perry Nuclear Power Plant; 
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. NPF-58, issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 
(FENOC, the licensee), for operation of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant, 
Unit 1 (PNPP), located in Ottawa County, Ohio. Therefore, as required 
by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental assessment. Based 
on the results of this environmental assessment, the NRC is issuing a 
finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt the PNPP from the required 
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for a certain new requirement of 
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, PNPP 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. FENOC has proposed an 
alternate full compliance date of November 25, 2010, approximately 8 
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 PNPP site.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated November 30, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML093370151, not publically 
available, contains security-related information), as supplemented on 
December 23, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093650293, not publically 
available, contains security-related information).

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to provide the licensee with 
additional time to perform to design the necessary modifications, 
procure equipment and material, and implement upgrades to comply with a 
specific aspect of 10 CFR 73.55.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation 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 details of the 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.
    The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological 
hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the environment 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 effect 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 environment assessment and published a finding of no 
significant impact (part 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR 
13926, 13967 (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 action, the 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 ``no-action'' 
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, 
NUREG-0884 dated August 1982, for the PNPP.

[[Page 14639]]

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, http://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