Energy Northwest; Columbia Generating Station Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 61225-61226 [2010-24811]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Notices
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day
of September 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jessie Quichocho,
Chief, Research and Test Reactors Licensing
Branch, Division of Policy and Rulemaking,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–24809 Filed 10–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
The proposed action is in accordance
with the licensee’s application dated
April 28, 2010 (Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS) Accession No.
ML101250340), as supplemented by
letter dated August 9, 2010 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML102300537).
The Need for the Proposed Action
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50–397; NRC–2010–0029]
Energy Northwest; Columbia
Generating Station Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No
Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
changes to the Emergency Plan,
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54, ‘‘Conditions
of licenses,’’ paragraph (q), for Facility
Operating License No. NPF–21, issued
to Energy Northwest (EN, 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.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Environmental Assessment
Identification of the Proposed Action
The proposed action would revise the
Emergency Plan to support U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) nonintrusive surveillance and
characterization activities within the
618–11 High-Level Waste Burial Ground
(618–11). The 618–11 site is an 8-acre
parcel located on DOE property that is
directly adjacent to land leased by EN
from the DOE, and is located wholly
within CGS’s Exclusion Area Boundary.
The site was used from 1962 through
1967 and contains low- to high-activity
waste, fission products, some
plutonium-contaminated waste, and
toxicological waste. The DOE intends to
remediate 618–11 and other waste
burial ground locations on the Hanford
Site. The licensee proposes to modify
the Emergency Plan to address interagency coordination, cooperation, and
responsibilities for potential 618–11 site
events and to add specific emergency
action level criteria and actions
associated with any potential toxic,
flammable, or radioactive material
release from an abnormal event at the
618–11 site that could pose a threat to
the health and safety of licensee staff or
visitors within the CGS exclusion area.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:23 Oct 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
The 618–11 site is an 8-acre parcel
located on DOE property that is directly
adjacent to land leased by EN from the
DOE, and is located wholly within
CGS’s Exclusion Area Boundary. The
site was used from 1962 through 1967
and contains low- to high-activity waste,
fission products, some plutoniumcontaminated waste, and toxicological
waste. The Hanford Federal Facility
Agreement and Consent Order between
the DOE, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, and the State of
Washington, is the legal document that
binds DOE to milestones to remediate
the 618–11 site, among other waste
burial ground locations, on the Hanford
Site. The non-intrusive surveillance and
characterization activities will obtain
data and information necessary for
planning future intrusive activities and
remediation strategies. The licensee
proposes to modify the Emergency Plan
to address inter-agency coordination,
cooperation, and responsibilities for
potential 618–11 site events during the
DOE’s non-intrusive surveillance and
characterization activities and to add
specific emergency action level criteria
and actions associated with any
potential toxic, flammable, or
radioactive material release from an
abnormal event at the 618–11 site that
could pose a threat to the health and
safety of licensee staff or visitors within
the CGS exclusion area.
The NRC has completed its evaluation
of the proposed action and concludes
that the proposed changes to the CGS
Emergency Plan meet the standards of
10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements of
Appendix E to 10 CFR part 50 and
provide reasonable assurance that the
licensee will take adequate protective
measures in a radiological emergency.
The NRC staff’s safety evaluation will be
provided with the license amendment
that will be issued to the licensee
approving the changes to the Emergency
Plan.
In its application, the licensee also
requested changes to the CGS Final
Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The
NRC staff’s determination regarding the
proposed changes to the FSAR will be
provided by separate correspondence.
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
61225
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC has completed its
environmental assessment of the
proposed Emergency Plan changes to
CGS. The staff has concluded that the
changes 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 Final
Safety Analysis Report. There will be no
change to radioactive effluents that
affect radiation exposures to plant
workers and members of the public. No
changes will be made to plant buildings
or the site property. Therefore, no
changes or different types of
radiological impacts are expected as a
result of the proposed changes.
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 or the
plant, or to threatened, endangered, or
protected species under the Endangered
Species Act, or impacts to essential fish
habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens 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
noticeable effect on socioeconomic
conditions in the region. Therefore, no
changes or different types of nonradiological environmental impacts are
expected as a result of the proposed
action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes
that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with
the proposed action.
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. 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 CGS dated
December 1981.
E:\FR\FM\04OCN1.SGM
04OCN1
61226
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2010 / Notices
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on September 21, 2010, the NRC staff
consulted with the Washington State
official, Mr. R. Cowley of the Office of
Radiation Protection, 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 April 28, 2010, as supplemented
by letter dated August 9, 2010.
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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day
of September 2010.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl F. Lyon,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV,
Division of Operating Reactor Licensing,
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–24811 Filed 10–1–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2010–0314; Docket Nos. 50–313 and
50–368]
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Exemption; Entergy Operations, Inc.;
Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2
1.0 Background
Entergy Operations, Inc. (Entergy, the
licensee) is the holder of Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–51 and
NPF–6, which authorize operation of
the Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and
2 (ANO–1 and ANO–2), respectively.
The licenses provide, among other
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:23 Oct 01, 2010
Jkt 223001
things, that the facility is subject to all
rules, regulations, and orders of the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC,
the Commission) now or hereafter in
effect.
The facility consists of two
pressurized-water reactors located in
Pope County, Arkansas.
2.0 Request/Action
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 50, Section 50.36a,
paragraph (a)(2) (10 CFR 50.36a(a)(2))
requires each licensee to ‘‘submit a
report to the Commission annually that
specifies the quantity of each of the
principal radionuclides released to
unrestricted areas in liquid and in
gaseous effluents during the previous 12
months, including any other
information as may be required by the
Commission to estimate maximum
potential annual radiation doses to the
public resulting from effluent releases.
The report must be submitted as
specified in § 50.4, and the time
between submission of the reports must
be no longer than 12 months. If
quantities of radioactive materials
released during the reporting period are
significantly above design objectives,
the report must cover this specifically.’’
The licensee submitted its Radioactive
Effluent Release Report for the Calendar
Year 2009 on February 25, 2010.
The ANO–1 Technical Specification
(TS) 5.5.1 and ANO–2 TS 6.5.1 require
the Radioactive Effluent Release Report,
covering the operation of each unit in
the previous year, to be submitted prior
to May 1 of each year in accordance
with 10 CFR 50.36a. Originally, both
ANO–1 and ANO–2 TSs required this
report be submitted either prior to
March 1 or within 60 days of January 1
of each year. Later, during the ANO–1
TS conversion, the submittal date for
ANO–1 became May 1. The licensee
continued to send one submittal for the
site as allowed by the TSs. The licensee
also continued to submit the report in
accordance with the March 1 deadline.
Entergy proposed to reorganize Section
6 of the ANO–2 TS in 2003. The
proposed changes were to make the
ANO–2 requirements consistent with
the ANO–1 TS requirements. These
changes were subsequently approved by
the NRC and the submittal date became
‘‘prior to May 1’’ of each year for both
units. However, while the submittal
dates were consistent again between the
ANO–1 and ANO–2 TSs, the 12-month
interval between submittals was not
addressed. The actual submittal date
remained at the end of February of each
year because, the TS changes
notwithstanding, the time between
report submittals cannot be more than
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
12 months. As a result, a period of only
2 months is available to prepare and
submit the report. With ANO continuing
to send one submittal for the site, this
presents an undue administrative
burden on ANO personnel due to the
compressed schedule for data
collection, report preparation, and
internal review following the closure of
the reporting period.
Therefore, the licensee has requested
a one-time exemption from the 12month reporting criteria specified in 10
CFR 50.36a(a)(2) for its submittal of the
calendar year 2010 Radioactive Effluent
Release Report. The proposed
exemption allows an additional 2
months for these activities to match the
current submittal date stated in the TSs.
In summary, the exemption does not
affect the information required to be
submitted or the time period the report
covers, only the date the report is
submitted. Subsequent submittals,
pursuant to 10 CFR 50.36a(a)(2), will
follow the 12-month reporting criteria.
The application for exemption, dated
March 18, 2010, is publicly available in
the Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) under
ADAMS Accession No. ML100780094).
3.0
Discussion
Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the
Commission may, upon application by
any interested person or upon its own
initiative, grant exemptions from the
requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, when
(1) the exemptions are authorized by
law, will not present an undue risk to
public health or safety, and are
consistent with the common defense
and security; and (2) when special
circumstances are present. These
circumstances include the special
circumstances that would provide only
temporary relief from the applicable
regulation and the licensee or applicant
has made good faith efforts to comply
with the regulation.
Authorized by Law
This exemption would allow the
licensee to submit the 2010 Radioactive
Effluent Release Report prior to May 1,
2011, which would exceed the report
submittal requirement of no longer than
12 months specified in 10 CFR
50.36a(a)(2). As stated above, 10 CFR
50.12 allows the NRC to grant
exemptions from the requirements of 10
CFR Part 50. The NRC staff has
determined that granting of the
licensee’s proposed exemption will not
result in a violation of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, or the
Commission’s regulations. Therefore,
the exemption is authorized by law.
E:\FR\FM\04OCN1.SGM
04OCN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 191 (Monday, October 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61225-61226]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24811]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-397; NRC-2010-0029]
Energy Northwest; Columbia Generating Station Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering changes
to the Emergency Plan, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54, ``Conditions of
licenses,'' paragraph (q), for Facility Operating License No. NPF-21,
issued to Energy Northwest (EN, 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 revise the Emergency Plan to support U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE) non-intrusive surveillance and
characterization activities within the 618-11 High-Level Waste Burial
Ground (618-11). The 618-11 site is an 8-acre parcel located on DOE
property that is directly adjacent to land leased by EN from the DOE,
and is located wholly within CGS's Exclusion Area Boundary. The site
was used from 1962 through 1967 and contains low- to high-activity
waste, fission products, some plutonium-contaminated waste, and
toxicological waste. The DOE intends to remediate 618-11 and other
waste burial ground locations on the Hanford Site. The licensee
proposes to modify the Emergency Plan to address inter-agency
coordination, cooperation, and responsibilities for potential 618-11
site events and to add specific emergency action level criteria and
actions associated with any potential toxic, flammable, or radioactive
material release from an abnormal event at the 618-11 site that could
pose a threat to the health and safety of licensee staff or visitors
within the CGS exclusion area.
The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's
application dated April 28, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML101250340), as supplemented
by letter dated August 9, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102300537).
The Need for the Proposed Action
The 618-11 site is an 8-acre parcel located on DOE property that is
directly adjacent to land leased by EN from the DOE, and is located
wholly within CGS's Exclusion Area Boundary. The site was used from
1962 through 1967 and contains low- to high-activity waste, fission
products, some plutonium-contaminated waste, and toxicological waste.
The Hanford Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order between the
DOE, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the State of
Washington, is the legal document that binds DOE to milestones to
remediate the 618-11 site, among other waste burial ground locations,
on the Hanford Site. The non-intrusive surveillance and
characterization activities will obtain data and information necessary
for planning future intrusive activities and remediation strategies.
The licensee proposes to modify the Emergency Plan to address inter-
agency coordination, cooperation, and responsibilities for potential
618-11 site events during the DOE's non-intrusive surveillance and
characterization activities and to add specific emergency action level
criteria and actions associated with any potential toxic, flammable, or
radioactive material release from an abnormal event at the 618-11 site
that could pose a threat to the health and safety of licensee staff or
visitors within the CGS exclusion area.
The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and
concludes that the proposed changes to the CGS Emergency Plan meet the
standards of 10 CFR 50.47(b) and the requirements of Appendix E to 10
CFR part 50 and provide reasonable assurance that the licensee will
take adequate protective measures in a radiological emergency. The NRC
staff's safety evaluation will be provided with the license amendment
that will be issued to the licensee approving the changes to the
Emergency Plan.
In its application, the licensee also requested changes to the CGS
Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). The NRC staff's determination
regarding the proposed changes to the FSAR will be provided by separate
correspondence.
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed
Emergency Plan changes to CGS. The staff has concluded that the changes
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 Final Safety Analysis
Report. There will be no change to radioactive effluents that affect
radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. No
changes will be made to plant buildings or the site property.
Therefore, no changes or different types of radiological impacts are
expected as a result of the proposed changes.
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 or the plant, or to threatened,
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens 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 noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the region.
Therefore, no changes or different types of non-radiological
environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed action.
Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.
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. 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
CGS dated December 1981.
[[Page 61226]]
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on September 21, 2010, the
NRC staff consulted with the Washington State official, Mr. R. Cowley
of the Office of Radiation Protection, 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 April 28, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated
August 9, 2010. 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.resource@nrc.gov.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 28th day of September 2010.
For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl F. Lyon,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-24811 Filed 10-1-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
