James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 14637-14638 [2010-6760]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 58 / Friday, March 26, 2010 / Notices
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. 2010–6758 Filed 3–25–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–333; NRC–2010–0136]
James A. FitzPatrick 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. DPR–59, issued
to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the
licensee), for the operation of the James
A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant
(JAFNPP) located in Oswego County,
NY. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21,
the NRC prepared an environmental
assessment. Based on the results of the
environmental assessment, the NRC is
issuing a finding of no significant
impact.
Environmental Assessment
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would exempt
JAFNPP from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010,
for several new requirements of 10 CFR
part 73. Specifically, JAFNPP 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.
JAFNPP has proposed an alternate full
compliance implementation date of
December 31, 2010, approximately 9
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 JAFNPP
site.
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
January 21, 2010, as supplemented by
letters dated February 25 and March 2,
2010.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
15:23 Mar 25, 2010
Jkt 220001
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 JAFNPP security system due to
design, resource and logistical impacts
from adverse winter weather and from
material delivery dates.
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 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, (March 27, 2009).
The NRC staff’s safety evaluation will
be provided in the exemption that will
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14637
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 actions (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 the ‘‘Final Environmental
Statement related to operation of James
A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant
Power Authority of the State of New
York, Docket No. 50–333,’’ dated March
1973, as supplemented through the
‘‘Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for License Renewal of
Nuclear Plants: Supplement 31
Regarding James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear
Power Plant, Final Report’’ (NUREG—
1437, Supplement 31), January 2008.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on February 19, 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 21, 2010, as
supplemented by letters dated February
25 and March 2, 2010. Portions of the
submittal dated January 21, 2010, as
supplemented by letter dated February
25, 2010, contain sensitive security
related information and, accordingly,
are withheld from public disclosure in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.390. The
letter dated March 2, 2010, is the
redacted version of the letter dated
February 25, 2010. Publicly available
E:\FR\FM\26MRN1.SGM
26MRN1
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: 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.
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
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 58 (Friday, March 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14637-14638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6760]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-333; NRC-2010-0136]
James A. FitzPatrick 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. DPR-59, issued to Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (the
licensee), for the operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power
Plant (JAFNPP) located in Oswego County, NY. In accordance with 10 CFR
51.21, the NRC prepared 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 JAFNPP from the required
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for several new requirements of
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, JAFNPP 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. JAFNPP has proposed an
alternate full compliance implementation date of December 31, 2010,
approximately 9 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 JAFNPP site.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated January 21, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated
February 25 and March 2, 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 JAFNPP security
system due to design, resource and logistical impacts from adverse
winter weather and from material delivery dates.
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 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 action, the NRC staff considered
denial of the proposed actions (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 related to
operation of James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Power Authority
of the State of New York, Docket No. 50-333,'' dated March 1973, as
supplemented through the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplement 31 Regarding James A.
FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, Final Report'' (NUREG--1437,
Supplement 31), January 2008.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on February 19, 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 21, 2010, as supplemented by letters
dated February 25 and March 2, 2010. Portions of the submittal dated
January 21, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated February 25, 2010,
contain sensitive security related information and, accordingly, are
withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390. The
letter dated March 2, 2010, is the redacted version of the letter dated
February 25, 2010. Publicly available
[[Page 14638]]
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: 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.
Bhalchandra K. Vaidya,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-6760 Filed 3-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
