Northern States Power Company-Minnesota; Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 63213-63214 [2010-25878]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 198 / Thursday, October 14, 2010 / Notices
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 70–7015–ML; ASLBP No.
10–899–02–ML–BD01]
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board;
Notice of Opportunity To Participate in
Uncontested/Mandatory Hearing
(Procedures for Participation by
Interested Governmental Entities
Regarding Safety Portion of
Enrichment Facility Licensing
Proceeding)
October 7, 2010.
Before Administrative Judges: G. Paul
Bollwerk, III, Chairman, Dr. Kaye D.
Lathrop, Dr. Craig M. White.
In the Matter of Areva Enrichment Services,
LLC (Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility)
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
In this 10 CFR part 70 proceeding
regarding the request of applicant
AREVA Enrichment Services, LLC,
(AES) to construct and operate its
proposed Eagle Rock Enrichment
Facility in Bonneville County, Idaho, on
September 30, 2010, the NRC staff
issued its final safety evaluation report
(SER) analyzing the Atomic Energy Act
(AEA)-related safety aspects of the AES
application (NUREG–1951, ADAMS
Accession No. ML102710296). In accord
with AEA section 274l, 42 U.S.C.
2021(l), on or before Friday, November
12, 2010, using the agency’s E–Filing
system,1 any interested State, local
governmental body, or affected,
federally-recognized Indian Tribe may
file with the Licensing Board in this
proceeding a statement of any issues or
questions about which the State, local
governmental body, or Indian Tribe
wishes the Board to give particular
attention as part of the safety/SERrelated portion of the uncontested/
mandatory hearing process associated
with the AES application and the staff’s
safety review of that application.2 Such
1 The process for accessing and using the agency’s
E–Filing system is described in the July 23, 2009
notice of hearing that was issued by the
Commission for this proceeding. See Notice of
Receipt of Application for License; Notice of
Consideration of Issuance of License; Notice of
Hearing and Commission Order and Order
Imposing Procedures for Access to Sensitive
Unclassified Non-Safeguards Information and
Safeguards Information for Contention Preparation;
In the Matter of Areva Enrichment Services, LLC
(Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility), 74 FR 38,052,
38,055 (Jul. 30, 2009) (CLI–09–15, 70 NRC 1, 10–
11 (2009)).
2 The scope of, and procedural protocols
associated with, the uncontested/mandatory
hearing in this proceeding are set forth in the
Licensing Board’s orders of May 19, June 4, and
June 30, 2010, as well as its October 7, 2010
scheduling order. See Licensing Board Initial
Scheduling Order (May 19, 2010) at 3–7
(unpublished); Licensing Board Order (Clarifying
Initial Scheduling Order) (June 4, 2010) at 2–5
(unpublished); Licensing Board Order (Setting
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:10 Oct 13, 2010
Jkt 223001
a statement may be accompanied by any
supporting documentation that the
State, local governmental body, or
Indian Tribe sees fit to provide. Any
statements and supporting
documentation (if any) received by the
Board by the deadline indicated above
will be made part of the record of this
proceeding.
The Board will use such statements
and documents as appropriate to inform
its prehearing questions to the staff and
applicant AES; its inquiries at the oral
hearing currently scheduled for the
week of January 24, 2011, at the
Licensing Board Panel’s Rockville,
Maryland hearing room; and its decision
following the hearing.3 The Board may
also request, no later than Thursday,
January 13, 2011, that one or more
particular States, local governmental
bodies, or Indian Tribes send
representatives to the hearing to
participate as the Board may deem
appropriate, including answering Board
questions and/or making a statement for
the purpose of assisting the Board’s
exploration of one or more of the issues
raised by the State, local governmental
body, or Indian Tribe in the prehearing
filings described above. The decision on
whether to request the presence of
representatives of a State, local
governmental body, or Indian Tribe at
the hearing to participate in the oral
Aside Hold-Dates for Mandatory Hearings) (June 30,
2010) at 2 (unpublished); Licensing Board
Memorandum and Order (Initial General Schedule;
Revision to Mandatory Hearing Procedures; Inviting
Written Limited Appearance Statements;
Participation by Interested Governmental Entities)
(Oct. 7, 2010) (unpublished). As the Board’s
October 7, 2010 memorandum and order also
indicates, following the issuance of the staff’s final
environmental impact statement (EIS), the Board
anticipates establishing a schedule to govern IGE
participation in the environmental/EIS-related
portion of the uncontested/mandatory hearing for
this proceeding.
3 States, local governments, or Indian Tribes
should be aware that the uncontested/mandatory
hearing is separate and distinct from the NRC’s
contested hearing process, which has not been
invoked in this proceeding. While States, local
governments, or Indian Tribes participating as
described above may take any position they wish,
or no position at all, with respect to the AES
application or the staff’s associated safety review,
they should be cognizant that, due to the inherently
adversarial nature of such proceedings, many of the
procedures and rights applicable to the NRC’s
contested hearing process generally are not
available with respect to this uncontested hearing.
Participation in the NRC’s contested hearing
process is governed by 10 CFR 2.309 (for persons
or entities, including States, local governments, or
Indian Tribes, seeking to file contentions of their
own) and 10 CFR 2.315(c) (for interested States,
local governments, and Indian Tribes seeking to
participate with respect to contentions filed by
others). Participation in this uncontested hearing
does not affect the right of a State, local
governmental entity, or Indian Tribe to participate
in any separate contested hearing process that
might be requested relative to this proceeding.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
63213
hearing is solely at the Board’s
discretion. The Board’s request will
specify the issue or issues that the
representatives should be prepared to
address.
It is so ordered.
For the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board.
Dated: October 7, 2010.
G. Paul Bollwerk, III,
Administrative Judge, Rockville, Maryland.
[FR Doc. 2010–25877 Filed 10–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50–282 and 50–306; NRC–
2010–0324]
Northern States Power Company—
Minnesota; Prairie Island Nuclear
Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2;
Environmental Assessment and
Finding of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of an exemption from Title 10
of the Code of Federal Regulations, (10
CFR), 50.46, ‘‘Acceptance criteria for
emergency core cooling systems for
light-water nuclear power reactors’’, and
10 CFR 50, Appendix K, ‘‘AECCS
Evaluation Models,’’ for Facility
Operating License Nos. DPR–42 and
DPR–60, issued to Northern States
Power Company, a Minnesota
corporation (NSPM, the licensee), for
operation of the Prairie Island Nuclear
Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 (PINGP),
located in Goodhue County, Minnesota.
In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the
NRC performed an environmental
assessment in support of this requested
exemption. 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 consider
approval of an exemption for PINGP to
the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 and
10 CFR Appendix K, by allowing NSPM
to use Optimized ZIRLOTM, an
advanced alloy fuel cladding material
for pressurized-water reactors. The
proposed action is in accordance with
the licensee’s application dated
November 24, 2009 (Agencywide
Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS) Accession No.
ML093280883), as supplemented by
letter dated May 26, 2010 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML101480083).
E:\FR\FM\14OCN1.SGM
14OCN1
63214
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 198 / Thursday, October 14, 2010 / Notices
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed so that
NSPM can use Optimized ZIRLOTM, an
advanced alloy for fuel rod cladding and
other assembly structural components at
the PINGP.
Section 50.46 of 10 CFR and 10 CFR
part 50, Appendix K, make no
provisions 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 or in other assembly
structural components at the PINGP.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
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
approve the use of an additional fuel
rod cladding material would not
significantly affect plant safety and
would not have a significant adverse
effect on the probability of an accident
occurring.
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.
The proposed action would not result
in an increased radiological hazard
beyond those previously analyzed in the
Final Environmental Statement for the
PINGP dated May 1973 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML081840311). 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 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
impact to socioeconomic resources.
Therefore, no changes to or different
types of non-radiological environmental
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:10 Oct 13, 2010
Jkt 223001
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.
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
request 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
considered in the Final Environmental
Statement for the PINGP dated May
1973 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML081840311).
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy,
on September 3, 2010, the staff
consulted with the Minnesota State
official, Mr. Stephen Rakow of the
Minnesota Office of Energy Security,
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.
Further Information
For further details with respect to the
proposed action, see the licensee’s letter
dated November 24, 2009 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML093280883), as
supplemented by letter dated May 26,
2010 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML101480083). 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
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
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
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 27th day
of September 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas J. Wengert,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing
Branch III–1, Division of Operating Reactor
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor
Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010–25878 Filed 10–13–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2010–0267]
Errata Notice; Notice of Public
Workshop on a Potential Rulemaking
for Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing
Facilities
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
AGENCY:
Errata Notice; Notice of Public
Workshop.
ACTION:
Jose
Cuadrado, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001, telephone 301–492–
3287; e-mail Jose.Cuadrado@nrc.gov.
SUMMARY: The Notice of Public
Workshop on a Potential Rulemaking for
Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing
Facilities issued on July 23, 2010 (75 FR
45167, August 2, 2010), states that the
date and location of the public
workshops are as follows:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
The public workshops will be held in
Rockville, Maryland, on September 7–8,
2010, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. and in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, on the week of
October 4, 2010, from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. The
September 7–8, 2010, workshop will be held
at the Hilton Washington, DC/Rockville Hotel
& Executive Meeting Center, located at 1750
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The
exact dates and location for the October 2010
workshop in Albuquerque, New Mexico, will
be noticed no fewer than ten (10) days prior
to the workshop [* * *]
The dates and location for the October
2010 workshop have been finalized. The
workshop will be held on October 19–
20, 2010, at the Sheraton Albuquerque
Uptown Hotel, located at 2600
Louisiana Boulevard NE, Albuquerque,
New Mexico.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 5th day
of October, 2010.
E:\FR\FM\14OCN1.SGM
14OCN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 198 (Thursday, October 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 63213-63214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25878]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. 50-282 and 50-306; NRC-2010-0324]
Northern States Power Company--Minnesota; Prairie Island Nuclear
Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding
of No Significant Impact
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering the
issuance of an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, (10 CFR), 50.46, ``Acceptance criteria for emergency core
cooling systems for light-water nuclear power reactors'', and 10 CFR
50, Appendix K, ``AECCS Evaluation Models,'' for Facility Operating
License Nos. DPR-42 and DPR-60, issued to Northern States Power
Company, a Minnesota corporation (NSPM, the licensee), for operation of
the Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 (PINGP),
located in Goodhue County, Minnesota. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21,
the NRC performed an environmental assessment in support of this
requested exemption. 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 consider approval of an exemption for
PINGP to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR Appendix K, by
allowing NSPM to use Optimized ZIRLOTM, an advanced alloy
fuel cladding material for pressurized-water reactors. The proposed
action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated November
24, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS)
Accession No. ML093280883), as supplemented by letter dated May 26,
2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML101480083).
[[Page 63214]]
The Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action is needed so that NSPM can use Optimized
ZIRLOTM, an advanced alloy for fuel rod cladding and other
assembly structural components at the PINGP.
Section 50.46 of 10 CFR and 10 CFR part 50, Appendix K, make no
provisions 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 or in other assembly structural components at the PINGP.
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 approve
the use of an additional fuel rod cladding material would not
significantly affect plant safety and would not have a significant
adverse effect on the probability of an accident occurring.
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.
The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological
hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the Final Environmental
Statement for the PINGP dated May 1973 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML081840311). 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-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 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.
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 request 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 considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the PINGP
dated May 1973 (ADAMS Accession No. ML081840311).
Agencies and Persons Consulted
In accordance with its stated policy, on September 3, 2010, the
staff consulted with the Minnesota State official, Mr. Stephen Rakow of
the Minnesota Office of Energy Security, 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.
Further Information
For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the
licensee's letter dated November 24, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML093280883), as supplemented by letter dated May 26, 2010 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML101480083). 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 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 27th day of September 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Thomas J. Wengert,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-25878 Filed 10-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P