STP Nuclear Operating Company South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 3 and 4 Request for Exemption Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 67784-67788 [2010-27764]

Download as PDF 67784 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Notices NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on AP1000; Notice of Meeting present oral statements can be obtained from the Web site cited above or by contacting the identified DFO. Moreover, in view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with these references if such rescheduling would result in a major inconvenience. Dated: October 28, 2010. Antonio Dias, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch B, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. Wednesday, December 1, 2010—8:30 a.m. Until 5 p.m. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES The ACRS Subcommittee on AP1000 will hold a meeting on December 1, 2010, Room T–2B1, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance with the exception of portions that may be closed to protect proprietary information pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(4). The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION The Subcommittee will review open issues associated with the revisions to the AP1000 Design Control Document (DCD). The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with Westinghouse, the NRC staff, and other interested persons. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official (DFO), Weidong Wang (Telephone 301–415–6279 or E-mail: Weidong.Wang@nrc.gov) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the DFO thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the DFO one day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this timeframe, presenters should provide the DFO with a CD containing each presentation at least thirty minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 21, 2010 (75 FR 65038–65039). Detailed meeting agendas and meeting transcripts are available on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs. Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:21 Nov 02, 2010 Jkt 223001 [FR Doc. 2010–27823 Filed 11–2–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS); Meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal; Notice of Meeting The ACRS Subcommittee on Plant License Renewal will hold a meeting on December 1, 2010, Room T–2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. The entire meeting will be open to public attendance. The agenda for the subject meeting shall be as follows: Wednesday, December 1, 2010—1:30 p.m. Until 5 p.m. The Subcommittee will review the license renewal application for Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 and the staff’s associated draft Safety Evaluation Report (SER) with Open Items. The Subcommittee will hear presentations by and hold discussions with PSEG Nuclear LLC, the NRC staff, and other interested persons regarding this matter. The Subcommittee will gather information, analyze relevant issues and facts, and formulate proposed positions and actions, as appropriate, for deliberation by the Full Committee. Members of the public desiring to provide oral statements and/or written comments should notify the Designated Federal Official (DFO), Mrs. Kathy Weaver (Telephone 301–415–6236 or Email: Kathy.Weaver@nrc.gov) five days prior to the meeting, if possible, so that appropriate arrangements can be made. Thirty-five hard copies of each presentation or handout should be provided to the DFO thirty minutes before the meeting. In addition, one electronic copy of each presentation should be emailed to the DFO one day before the meeting. If an electronic copy cannot be provided within this PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 timeframe, presenters should provide the DFO with a CD containing each presentation at least thirty minutes before the meeting. Electronic recordings will be permitted only during those portions of the meeting that are open to the public. Detailed procedures for the conduct of and participation in ACRS meetings were published in the Federal Register on October 21, 2010, (75 FR 65038–65039). Detailed meeting agendas and meeting transcripts are available on the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs. Information regarding topics to be discussed, changes to the agenda, whether the meeting has been canceled or rescheduled, and the time allotted to present oral statements can be obtained from the website cited above or by contacting the identified DFO. Moreover, in view of the possibility that the schedule for ACRS meetings may be adjusted by the Chairman as necessary to facilitate the conduct of the meeting, persons planning to attend should check with these references if such rescheduling would result in a major inconvenience. Dated: October 28, 2010. Cayetano Santos, Chief, Reactor Safety Branch A, Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards. [FR Doc. 2010–27811 Filed 11–2–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 52–012 and 52–013; NRC– 2010–0343] STP Nuclear Operating Company South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 3 and 4 Request for Exemption Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact By letters dated March 23, 2010 (STPNOC 2010a), and July 21, 2010 (STPNOC 2010b), STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) submitted a request for an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Section 50.10: License required; limited work authorization. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff) is considering issuance of this exemption as it relates to STPNOC’s application for combined licenses (COLs) for South Texas Project Electric Generating Station (STP) Units 3 and 4, which is currently under review by the NRC. The exemption would authorize STPNOC to install two crane foundation E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM 03NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Notices retaining walls (CFRWs) prior to issuance of the COLs. Granting this exemption would not constitute a commitment by the NRC to issue COLs for STP Units 3 and 4; STPNOC would install the CFRWs assuming the risk that its COL application may later be denied. NRC has prepared this environmental assessment (EA) for the exemption request in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21. Based on this EA, the NRC has reached a Finding of No Significant Impact. The details of the NRC staff’s safety review of the exemption request will be provided in the safety evaluation document associated with that determination. Environmental Assessment jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Background By letter dated January 8, 2010, the NRC notified STPNOC that installation of the CFRWs was considered construction under 10 CFR 50.10(a)(1), therefore requiring issuance of a limited work authorization (LWA) or COLs before their installation (NRC 2010a). In accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(b), STPNOC has requested an exemption that would permit the construction of the CFRWs prior to the issuance of COLs for STP Units 3 and 4 (STPNOC 2010). Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action, as described in STPNOC’s request for an exemption to 10 CFR 50.10, would allow STPNOC to install two CFRWs for STP Units 3 and 4, prior to issuance of COLs. According to STPNOC, the CFRWs are non-safety related, reinforced concrete walls that would facilitate excavation activities by retaining soil next to permanent plant structures in the excavations. STPNOC states that the CFRWs are required to accommodate the reach of a heavy-lift crane needed to place reactor components into the excavations. Installation of the CFRWs would include the following activities: • A full-depth and -width slurry excavation would be made, with the excavation maintained by the slurry; • Reinforcing would be placed in the slurry-filled trench; • Concrete would be placed in the slurry-filled trench from the bottom-up; and • Tiebacks and whalers would be installed to stabilize the CFRWs, as excavation for permanent plant structures proceeds. As construction of the permanent plant structures proceeds, the CFRWs would be abandoned in place following crane use. After abandonment, the CFRWs would have no function during operation of STP Units 3 and 4. VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:21 Nov 02, 2010 Jkt 223001 Need for the Proposed Action In its exemption request, STPNOC stated that the proposed exemption is needed because installation of the CFRWs must occur before excavation for permanent plant structures, and compliance with 10 CFR 50.10, i.e., obtaining an LWA, would result in undue hardship or other costs that are significantly in excess of those contemplated during the 2007 LWA rulemaking. According to the exemption request, installation of the CFRWs is needed to allow STPNOC to complete certain on-site activities in parallel with the licensing process, so that it can begin construction promptly upon issuance of COLs. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of STPNOC’s proposed installation of the CFRWs, including the non-radiological and radiological impacts that may result from granting the requested exemption. This evaluation is based on STPNOC’s exemption request, dated March 23, 2010, and on information provided by STPNOC in support of its COL application for proposed STP Units 3 and 4, primarily Revision 3 of the environmental report (ER) (STPNOC 2009). According to STPNOC’s exemption request, the environmental impacts of installing the CFRWs are within the scope of preconstruction activities described in Chapters 3 and 4 of STP Units 3 and 4 ER. Certain facilities, such as a concrete batch plant, lay down areas, parking lots, and temporary buildings, would be required for preconstruction activities at the STP site, and as such, are not exclusive to the installation of the CFRWs. It is expected that these facilities would already be in place and supporting preconstruction activities, and as such, this EA does not include the environmental impacts of such facilities. Description of the Site The STP site is located in a rural area of Matagorda County, Texas, approximately 10 miles (mi) north of Matagorda Bay, 70 mi south-southwest of Houston, and 12 mi south-southwest of Bay City. The proposed location of STP Units 3 and 4 is within the site boundaries of the existing STP Units 1 and 2, approximately 1,500 feet (ft) north and 2,150 ft west of the center of Units 1 and 2. The STP site comprises 12,220 acres (ac) immediately west of the Colorado River, approximately 10 mi upstream of the river’s confluence PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67785 with Matagorda Bay. The Main Cooling Reservoir, a man-made impoundment that is the normal heat sink for waste heat generated by STP Units 1 and 2, occupies approximately 7,000 ac of the STP site, and about 1,750 ac are currently occupied by Units 1 and 2 and associated facilities. The remainder of the site is undeveloped land or is used for agriculture and cattle grazing. The area that would be affected on a longterm basis as a result of permanent facilities for proposed Units 3 and 4 would be approximately 300 ac. An additional approximately 240 ac would be disturbed for temporary construction facilities. Nonradiological Impacts Land Use Impacts Installation of each CFRW would disturb an area approximately 890 ft long by 13 ft wide, which is approximately 23,140 square ft (0.54 ac) for both CFRWs. This would be a minor portion of the 12,220-ac STP site, and would be located in an area that was previously disturbed during construction of STP Units 1 and 2. As such, the NRC staff concludes that land use impacts from installation of the CFRWs would not be significant. Surface and Groundwater Impacts Installation of the CFRWs would have insignificant impacts on groundwater flow and surface water quality. While the purpose of the CFRWs is for building Units 3 and 4, they would remain in place after construction and could slightly reduce the permeability of the affected area. The completed CFRWs would each be approximately 3 ft wide, 890 ft long and 80 ft deep. In the vicinity of the STP site, the Shallow Aquifer’s base is between 90 and 150 ft below ground surface (STPNOC 2009). Because there would be a gap between the bottom of the CFRWs and the top of the Shallow Aquifer, groundwater flow would not be significantly impacted. Sediment carried with stormwater from the disturbed areas could impact surface water quality. STPNOC would be required to implement environmental controls specified in its Clean Water Act Section 402(p) Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) general permit for construction of STP Units 3 and 4 (STPNOC 2009). In its exemption request, STPNOC has stated that it would employ best management practices (BMPs) during installation of the CFRWs in accordance with these regulatory and permit requirements (STPNOC 2010), which would limit the impacts of ground disturbance to surface water quality. BMPs would be E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM 03NON1 67786 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Notices described in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would be submitted to and approved by the Texas Council on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) in accordance with STPNOC’s TPDES general permit (STPNOC 2009). With these controls, the NRC staff concludes that impacts to surface water quality from installation of the CFRWs would not be significant. Terrestrial Resources Impacts As stated above, the proposed action would be a small portion of the 12,220– ac STP site, and land disturbance for the CFRWs would occur in previously disturbed areas on the STP site. Therefore, the staff concludes there would be no impacts to terrestrial species or their habitat associated with the proposed action. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Aquatic Resources Impacts Impacts to aquatic resources from the proposed action would occur from erosion and sedimentation associated with site stormwater management. As stated above, as part of its SWPPP, STPNOC would employ BMPs to minimize impacts from stormwater runoff to ditches and wetlands. STPNOC plans to implement new detention ponds and drainage capacity to accommodate surface water runoff in areas disturbed by site preparation and construction activities (STPNOC 2009). Impacts from any stormwater runoff reaching ditches and wetlands would be minimal and temporary. As such, the staff concludes that impacts to aquatic resources from installation of the CFRWs would not be significant. Threatened and Endangered Species Impacts Potential impacts to threatened and endangered species from the proposed action result from land disturbances to terrestrial species. Two species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, that occur on or in the vicinity (within 10 miles) of the STP site are the Federally endangered Northern Aplomado falcon (Falco femoralis septentrionalis) and the Federally threatened American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). The Federally endangered whooping crane (Grus americana), a species of special concern to Texas resource agencies and environmental groups, has not been observed on the STP site. These birds may migrate through the area and fly over the STP site, but are unlikely to use the inland habitats found onsite. Because no impacts are expected to occur for terrestrial species or their habitat, the proposed action VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:21 Nov 02, 2010 Jkt 223001 would have no impacts on the Northern Aplomado falcon, the American alligator, or their habitats. The staff concludes there would be no effects on federally threatened or endangered species as a result of the proposed action. Cultural and Historic Resources Impacts According to the environmental report contained in STPNOC’s COL application for STP Units 3 and 4, there are no cultural and historic resources at the STP site (STPNOC 2009). In support of its COLs application, STPNOC consulted with the Texas Historical Commission and received concurrence on its findings in January 2007 (STPNOC 2006, 2009). The NRC’s independent review of cultural resources in support of the environmental review for STPNOC’s COLs application also did not identify any cultural and historical resources that would be impacted by construction and operation of proposed STP Units 3 and 4 (NRC 2010b). The area where the CFRWs would be installed was previously disturbed during construction of STP Units 1 and 2, and any resources that may have existed prior to construction of Units 1 and 2 would have been destroyed during land clearing and construction activities (STPNOC 2010). Therefore, the staff concludes that no environmental impacts to cultural and historic resources are expected from installation of the CFRWs. STPNOC has procedures in place to protect undiscovered historic or archaeological resources if discovered during site preparation and construction activities, and such procedures would apply to the proposed action (STPNOC 2008). Air Quality Impacts Installation of the CFRWs would result in temporary impacts on local air quality from vehicle and construction equipment emissions, and fugitive dust caused by earth-moving activities. As stated in the ER for the COL application, to minimize impacts to air quality, STPNOC would implement mitigation measures to minimize fugitive dust and vehicle and equipment emissions, including water suppression, covering truck loads and debris stockpiles, use of soil adhesives to stabilize loose dirt surfaces, minimizing material handling, limiting vehicle speed, and visual inspection of emission control equipment (STPNOC 2009). Construction equipment would be serviced regularly and operated in accordance with local, State, and Federal emission requirements (STPNOC 2009). Emissions from PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 activities associated with installation of the CFRWs would vary based on the level and duration of the specific activity, but the overall impact on air quality is expected to be temporary and limited in magnitude. The staff concludes that the proposed action would not significantly contribute to air quality impacts at the STP site. Nonradiological Health Impacts Nonradiological health impacts to the public and workers from the proposed action would include exposure to fugitive dust, and vehicle and construction equipment exhaust, occupational injuries, and noise; as well as the transport of materials and personnel to and from the STP site. Adherence to Federal and State regulations regarding air quality, construction worker health, and noise would minimize nonradiological health impacts. Mitigation measures, such as operational controls and practices, worker training, use of personal protective equipment, and fugitive dust and exhaust emissions control measures, would further reduce impacts from the proposed action. Based on the number of shipments of building materials and the number of workers that would be transported to the STP site for site preparation and construction activities (STPNOC 2009), the staff concludes that nonradiological health impacts from transportation associated with installing the CFRWs would be minimal. STPNOC has estimated that 75 workers would be needed to install the CFRWs (STPNOC 2010). This would be a small fraction of the 2,400 workers needed during peak preconstruction activities. Accordingly, the staff concludes that nonradiological health impacts from the proposed action would not be significant. Nonradioactive Waste Impacts Nonradioactive waste impacts from the proposed action include impacts to land, water, and air from storage of excavated material, runoff to ditches and wetlands, and emissions from vehicles and construction equipment. Excavated materials would be stored onsite in borrow or spoil areas not to exceed 240 ac for the entire STP Units 3 and 4 project (STPNOC 2009). Surface water runoff from development activities would be controlled by implementation of a SWPPP (STPNOC 2010). Regulated practices for managing air emissions from construction equipment and temporary stationary sources, BMPs for controlling fugitive dust, and vehicle inspection and traffic management plans, would minimize impacts to air. With the above controls E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM 03NON1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Notices in place, the staff concludes that impacts of nonradioactive waste from the proposed action would not be significant. Socioeconomic Impacts and Environmental Justice Potential socioeconomic impacts due to the proposed action include physical impacts such as transportation, aesthetics, and air quality, and social impacts including demographics, economy, infrastructure, and community services. In its exemption request (STPNOC 2010), STPNOC stated that 75 workers would be needed to install the CFRWs. The peak number of workers required for preconstruction activities at the STP site would be 2,400 (STPNOC 2009). The proposed action would occur concurrently with other preconstruction activities, and therefore would not significantly affect the size of the STP Units 3 and 4 labor force. Given the small number of workers involved in installation of the CFRWs, the staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not have measurable socioeconomic impacts. With regard to environmental justice, due to the lack of significant environmental impacts resulting from the proposed action, the staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not have disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority and lowincome populations in the vicinity of the STP site. Summary Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that granting the proposed exemption that would permit installation of the CFRWs prior to the issuance of COLs would not result in significant changes in nonradiological impacts to land use, surface and groundwater resources, terrestrial and aquatic resources, threatened and endangered species, socioeconomic factors and environmental justice, cultural and historic resources, air quality, nonradiological human health, and nonradioactive waste. Radiological Impacts jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Radiological Health Impacts Sources of radiation exposure from existing STP Units 1 and 2 for construction workers include exposure from direct radiation and liquid and gaseous radiological effluents (STPNOC 2009). In support of the environmental review for the COL application, NRC staff estimated the annual direct dose to a construction worker would be approximately 10 millirem (mrem), assuming 2,080 hours worked at the VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:21 Nov 02, 2010 Jkt 223001 STP site per year (NRC 2010c). The maximum radiological dose to construction workers from gaseous and liquid pathways combined would be approximately 9 mrem. Therefore, the estimated annual dose to construction workers would be approximately 19 mrem based on an occupancy of 2,080 hours per year (STPNOC 2009), which is less than the 100 mrem annual dose limit to an individual member of public found in 10 CFR 20.1301. As such, the staff concludes that radiological impacts to construction workers as a result of the proposed action would be minimal. Accordingly, the staff concludes that there would be no significant radiological health impacts associated with the proposed exemption. Summary Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that granting the proposed exemption that would permit installation of the CFRWs prior to the issuance of COLs would not result in a significant increase in occupational radiation exposure. The staff concludes that there would be no significant radiological health impacts associated with the proposed exemption. Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of the proposed exemption (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). If NRC were to deny the exemption request, STPNOC would not be allowed to install the CFRWs before the COLs are issued, and would need to wait until a decision is made on its COL application before installing the CFRWs. Denial of the exemption request would avoid the environmental impacts discussed in this EA, unless NRC grants the COLs, in which case the impacts would be incurred but they would be delayed until issuance of the COLs. Agencies and Persons Consulted The NRC staff consulted with a number of Federal, State, regional, Tribal, and local organizations regarding the environmental impacts of granting the COLs for proposed STP Units 3 and 4, which includes the environmental impacts of installation of CFRWs and other construction activities. A complete list of organizations contacted can be found in Appendix B of the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for COLs for STP Units 3 and 4 (NRC 2010c). A partial list of Federal and State agencies contacted includes: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Advisory Council on Historic Preservation; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Region 6 and headquarters); National Marine Fisheries Service; U.S. Fish and PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 67787 Wildlife Service; Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; Texas Historical Commission; Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; and Texas State Historic Preservation Office. Comments from these agencies regarding the overall COLs action were incorporated into the DEIS, and if they were applicable to construction activities similar to installation of the CFRWs, they have been included in this EA. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared this EA for the proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC staff has determined that there would be no significant environmental impacts associated with granting the exemption, and an environmental impact statement need not be prepared. Additional Information STPNOC’s exemption request is available electronically at the NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at http://www. nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, you can access the NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS accession number for the exemption request is ML100880055. The ADAMS accession number for the EA is ML101580541. The ADAMS accession number for the DEIS for STP Units 3 and 4 (NUREG–1937, Vols. 1 and 2) is ML100700576. If you do not have access to ADAMS or have problems accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737, or via e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of October, 2010. For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Scott Flanders, Division Director, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews, Office of New Reactors. References STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2006. Letter from S. Dannhardt, STPNOC, to B. Martin, Texas Historical Commission, dated December 12, 2006, ‘‘Subject: South Texas Projects Units 3 and 4.’’ ADAMS Accession No. ML092100145. STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2008. Letter from M. McBurnett, STPNOC, to NRC, dated June 9, 2008, ‘‘Cultural or Historical Artifact Discovery During Construction.’’ ADAMS Accession No. ML081640213. STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2009. South Texas Project Units 3 and 4 Combined License Application, Part 3, Environmental Report. Revision 3, Bay E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM 03NON1 67788 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 212 / Wednesday, November 3, 2010 / Notices City, Texas. ADAMS Accession No. ML092931600. STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2010a. Letter from M. McBurnett, STPNOC, to NRC, dated March 23, 2010, ‘‘Request for Exemption to Authorize Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining Walls.’’ ADAMS Accession No. ML100880055. STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2010b. Letter from Scott Head, STPNOC, to NRC, dated July 21, 2010, ‘‘Revised Request for Exemption to Authorize Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining Walls.’’ ADAMS Accession No. ML102070274. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2000. Environmental Standard Review Plan—Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG–1555, Washington, DC Includes 2007 updates. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010a. Letter from M. Johnson, NRC, to M. McBurnett, STPNOC, dated January 8, 2010, ‘‘South Texas Project Nuclear Power Plant Units 3 and 4 Request for a Limited Work Authorization for Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining Walls.’’ ADAMS Accession No. ML093350744. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010b. Letter from R. Whited, NRC, to M. Wolfe, Texas Historical Commission, dated March 19, 2010, ‘‘Section 106 Consultation and Notification of the Issuance of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the South Texas Projects, Units 3 and 4, Combined License Application Review. ADAMS Accession No. ML100490740. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010c. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 3 and 4. NUREG–1937, Vol. 1 and 2, Washington, DC Accession No. ML100700576. [FR Doc. 2010–27764 Filed 11–2–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P PEACE CORPS Proposed Collection Renewal 60-Day notice and request for comments. ACTION: The Peace Corps will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for extension, without change, of a currently approved information collection. In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 USC Chapter 35), the Peace Corps invites the general public to comment on the renewal, without change to the Peace Corps Career Information Consultation (CIC) Waiver Form (OMB Control No. 0420–0531). This process is jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:21 Nov 02, 2010 Jkt 223001 conducted in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.10. Comments must be submitted on or before January 3, 2011. ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Denora Miller, FOIA Officer, Peace Corps, 1111 20th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20526. Denora Miller can be contacted by telephone at 202–692–1236 or e-mail at pcfr@peacecorps.gov. E-mail comments must be made in text and not in attachments. DATES: the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology. This notice is issued in Washington, DC, on October 28, 2010. Garry W. Stanberry, Deputy Associate Director for Management. [FR Doc. 2010–27752 Filed 11–2–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6051–01–P FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denora Miller, at Peace Corps address above. Proposal to renew a currently approved collection of information: OMB Control Number: 0420–0531. Title: Career Information Consultation (CIC) Waiver Form. Type of Review: Regular—extension, without change, currently approved collection. Respondents: Returned Peace Corps Volunteers and professionals in specific career fields. Respondents Obligation to Reply: Voluntary. Burden to the Public: a. Total annual reporting burden: 208 hours. b. Estimated average burden response: 5 minutes. c. Frequency of response: Annually. d. Estimated number of likely respondents: 2,500. General description of collection: Returned Volunteer Services needs this information to update contact information for individuals who volunteer to share information about their career field, their past or current employer(s), and their career and educational paths with current and returned Peace Corps Volunteers. These individuals voluntarily provide this information in assisting with employment re-entry for Returned Peace Corps Volunteers. This is a service outreach part of transitioning from the Peace Corps to the business world. The individuals who provide the information are offering to assist, mentor or network for jobs. Request for Comment: Peace Corps invites comments on whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for proper performance of the functions of the Peace Corps, including whether the information will have practical use; the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the information to be collected; and, ways to minimize SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34–63207; File No. SR– NASDAQ–2010–134] Self-Regulatory Organizations; The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change To Adopt Additional Criteria for Listing Commodity Stockpiling Companies That Have Indicated That Their Business Plan is To Buy and Hold Commodities October 28, 2010. Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2 notice is hereby given that on October 15, 2010, The NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (‘‘Nasdaq’’ or ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by Nasdaq. The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons. I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s Statement of the Terms of the Substance of the Proposed Rule Change Nasdaq proposes to adopt additional criteria for listing companies that have indicated that their business plan is to buy and hold commodities and to provide transparency to the criteria Nasdaq will apply in doing so. The text of the proposed rule change is below. Proposed new language is in italic; proposed deletions are in brackets.3 5101. Preamble to the Rule 5100 Series. No change. 1 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1). CFR 240.19b–4. 3 Changes are marked to the rule text that appears in the electronic manual of Nasdaq found at http://nasdaqomx.cchwallstreet.com. 2 17 E:\FR\FM\03NON1.SGM 03NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67784-67788]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27764]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 52-012 and 52-013; NRC-2010-0343]


STP Nuclear Operating Company South Texas Project Electric 
Generating Station, Units 3 and 4 Request for Exemption Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    By letters dated March 23, 2010 (STPNOC 2010a), and July 21, 2010 
(STPNOC 2010b), STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) submitted a 
request for an exemption from Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Section 50.10: License required; limited 
work authorization. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the 
staff) is considering issuance of this exemption as it relates to 
STPNOC's application for combined licenses (COLs) for South Texas 
Project Electric Generating Station (STP) Units 3 and 4, which is 
currently under review by the NRC. The exemption would authorize STPNOC 
to install two crane foundation

[[Page 67785]]

retaining walls (CFRWs) prior to issuance of the COLs. Granting this 
exemption would not constitute a commitment by the NRC to issue COLs 
for STP Units 3 and 4; STPNOC would install the CFRWs assuming the risk 
that its COL application may later be denied. NRC has prepared this 
environmental assessment (EA) for the exemption request in accordance 
with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21. Based on this EA, the NRC has 
reached a Finding of No Significant Impact. The details of the NRC 
staff's safety review of the exemption request will be provided in the 
safety evaluation document associated with that determination.

Environmental Assessment

Background

    By letter dated January 8, 2010, the NRC notified STPNOC that 
installation of the CFRWs was considered construction under 10 CFR 
50.10(a)(1), therefore requiring issuance of a limited work 
authorization (LWA) or COLs before their installation (NRC 2010a). In 
accordance with 10 CFR 50.12(b), STPNOC has requested an exemption that 
would permit the construction of the CFRWs prior to the issuance of 
COLs for STP Units 3 and 4 (STPNOC 2010).

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action, as described in STPNOC's request for an 
exemption to 10 CFR 50.10, would allow STPNOC to install two CFRWs for 
STP Units 3 and 4, prior to issuance of COLs. According to STPNOC, the 
CFRWs are non-safety related, reinforced concrete walls that would 
facilitate excavation activities by retaining soil next to permanent 
plant structures in the excavations. STPNOC states that the CFRWs are 
required to accommodate the reach of a heavy-lift crane needed to place 
reactor components into the excavations. Installation of the CFRWs 
would include the following activities:
     A full-depth and -width slurry excavation would be made, 
with the excavation maintained by the slurry;
     Reinforcing would be placed in the slurry-filled trench;
     Concrete would be placed in the slurry-filled trench from 
the bottom-up; and
     Tiebacks and whalers would be installed to stabilize the 
CFRWs, as excavation for permanent plant structures proceeds.
    As construction of the permanent plant structures proceeds, the 
CFRWs would be abandoned in place following crane use. After 
abandonment, the CFRWs would have no function during operation of STP 
Units 3 and 4.

Need for the Proposed Action

    In its exemption request, STPNOC stated that the proposed exemption 
is needed because installation of the CFRWs must occur before 
excavation for permanent plant structures, and compliance with 10 CFR 
50.10, i.e., obtaining an LWA, would result in undue hardship or other 
costs that are significantly in excess of those contemplated during the 
2007 LWA rulemaking. According to the exemption request, installation 
of the CFRWs is needed to allow STPNOC to complete certain on-site 
activities in parallel with the licensing process, so that it can begin 
construction promptly upon issuance of COLs.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    This EA evaluates the environmental impacts of STPNOC's proposed 
installation of the CFRWs, including the non-radiological and 
radiological impacts that may result from granting the requested 
exemption. This evaluation is based on STPNOC's exemption request, 
dated March 23, 2010, and on information provided by STPNOC in support 
of its COL application for proposed STP Units 3 and 4, primarily 
Revision 3 of the environmental report (ER) (STPNOC 2009). According to 
STPNOC's exemption request, the environmental impacts of installing the 
CFRWs are within the scope of preconstruction activities described in 
Chapters 3 and 4 of STP Units 3 and 4 ER. Certain facilities, such as a 
concrete batch plant, lay down areas, parking lots, and temporary 
buildings, would be required for preconstruction activities at the STP 
site, and as such, are not exclusive to the installation of the CFRWs. 
It is expected that these facilities would already be in place and 
supporting preconstruction activities, and as such, this EA does not 
include the environmental impacts of such facilities.

Description of the Site

    The STP site is located in a rural area of Matagorda County, Texas, 
approximately 10 miles (mi) north of Matagorda Bay, 70 mi south-
southwest of Houston, and 12 mi south-southwest of Bay City. The 
proposed location of STP Units 3 and 4 is within the site boundaries of 
the existing STP Units 1 and 2, approximately 1,500 feet (ft) north and 
2,150 ft west of the center of Units 1 and 2. The STP site comprises 
12,220 acres (ac) immediately west of the Colorado River, approximately 
10 mi upstream of the river's confluence with Matagorda Bay. The Main 
Cooling Reservoir, a man-made impoundment that is the normal heat sink 
for waste heat generated by STP Units 1 and 2, occupies approximately 
7,000 ac of the STP site, and about 1,750 ac are currently occupied by 
Units 1 and 2 and associated facilities. The remainder of the site is 
undeveloped land or is used for agriculture and cattle grazing. The 
area that would be affected on a long-term basis as a result of 
permanent facilities for proposed Units 3 and 4 would be approximately 
300 ac. An additional approximately 240 ac would be disturbed for 
temporary construction facilities.

Nonradiological Impacts

Land Use Impacts

    Installation of each CFRW would disturb an area approximately 890 
ft long by 13 ft wide, which is approximately 23,140 square ft (0.54 
ac) for both CFRWs. This would be a minor portion of the 12,220-ac STP 
site, and would be located in an area that was previously disturbed 
during construction of STP Units 1 and 2. As such, the NRC staff 
concludes that land use impacts from installation of the CFRWs would 
not be significant.

Surface and Groundwater Impacts

    Installation of the CFRWs would have insignificant impacts on 
groundwater flow and surface water quality. While the purpose of the 
CFRWs is for building Units 3 and 4, they would remain in place after 
construction and could slightly reduce the permeability of the affected 
area. The completed CFRWs would each be approximately 3 ft wide, 890 ft 
long and 80 ft deep. In the vicinity of the STP site, the Shallow 
Aquifer's base is between 90 and 150 ft below ground surface (STPNOC 
2009). Because there would be a gap between the bottom of the CFRWs and 
the top of the Shallow Aquifer, groundwater flow would not be 
significantly impacted.
    Sediment carried with stormwater from the disturbed areas could 
impact surface water quality. STPNOC would be required to implement 
environmental controls specified in its Clean Water Act Section 402(p) 
Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) general permit for 
construction of STP Units 3 and 4 (STPNOC 2009). In its exemption 
request, STPNOC has stated that it would employ best management 
practices (BMPs) during installation of the CFRWs in accordance with 
these regulatory and permit requirements (STPNOC 2010), which would 
limit the impacts of ground disturbance to surface water quality. BMPs 
would be

[[Page 67786]]

described in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that would 
be submitted to and approved by the Texas Council on Environmental 
Quality (TCEQ) in accordance with STPNOC's TPDES general permit (STPNOC 
2009). With these controls, the NRC staff concludes that impacts to 
surface water quality from installation of the CFRWs would not be 
significant.

Terrestrial Resources Impacts

    As stated above, the proposed action would be a small portion of 
the 12,220-ac STP site, and land disturbance for the CFRWs would occur 
in previously disturbed areas on the STP site. Therefore, the staff 
concludes there would be no impacts to terrestrial species or their 
habitat associated with the proposed action.

Aquatic Resources Impacts

    Impacts to aquatic resources from the proposed action would occur 
from erosion and sedimentation associated with site stormwater 
management. As stated above, as part of its SWPPP, STPNOC would employ 
BMPs to minimize impacts from stormwater runoff to ditches and 
wetlands. STPNOC plans to implement new detention ponds and drainage 
capacity to accommodate surface water runoff in areas disturbed by site 
preparation and construction activities (STPNOC 2009). Impacts from any 
stormwater runoff reaching ditches and wetlands would be minimal and 
temporary. As such, the staff concludes that impacts to aquatic 
resources from installation of the CFRWs would not be significant.

Threatened and Endangered Species Impacts

    Potential impacts to threatened and endangered species from the 
proposed action result from land disturbances to terrestrial species. 
Two species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended, that occur on or in the vicinity 
(within 10 miles) of the STP site are the Federally endangered Northern 
Aplomado falcon (Falco femoralis septentrionalis) and the Federally 
threatened American alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). The 
Federally endangered whooping crane (Grus americana), a species of 
special concern to Texas resource agencies and environmental groups, 
has not been observed on the STP site.
    These birds may migrate through the area and fly over the STP site, 
but are unlikely to use the inland habitats found onsite. Because no 
impacts are expected to occur for terrestrial species or their habitat, 
the proposed action would have no impacts on the Northern Aplomado 
falcon, the American alligator, or their habitats. The staff concludes 
there would be no effects on federally threatened or endangered species 
as a result of the proposed action.

Cultural and Historic Resources Impacts

    According to the environmental report contained in STPNOC's COL 
application for STP Units 3 and 4, there are no cultural and historic 
resources at the STP site (STPNOC 2009). In support of its COLs 
application, STPNOC consulted with the Texas Historical Commission and 
received concurrence on its findings in January 2007 (STPNOC 2006, 
2009). The NRC's independent review of cultural resources in support of 
the environmental review for STPNOC's COLs application also did not 
identify any cultural and historical resources that would be impacted 
by construction and operation of proposed STP Units 3 and 4 (NRC 
2010b). The area where the CFRWs would be installed was previously 
disturbed during construction of STP Units 1 and 2, and any resources 
that may have existed prior to construction of Units 1 and 2 would have 
been destroyed during land clearing and construction activities (STPNOC 
2010). Therefore, the staff concludes that no environmental impacts to 
cultural and historic resources are expected from installation of the 
CFRWs. STPNOC has procedures in place to protect undiscovered historic 
or archaeological resources if discovered during site preparation and 
construction activities, and such procedures would apply to the 
proposed action (STPNOC 2008).

Air Quality Impacts

    Installation of the CFRWs would result in temporary impacts on 
local air quality from vehicle and construction equipment emissions, 
and fugitive dust caused by earth-moving activities. As stated in the 
ER for the COL application, to minimize impacts to air quality, STPNOC 
would implement mitigation measures to minimize fugitive dust and 
vehicle and equipment emissions, including water suppression, covering 
truck loads and debris stockpiles, use of soil adhesives to stabilize 
loose dirt surfaces, minimizing material handling, limiting vehicle 
speed, and visual inspection of emission control equipment (STPNOC 
2009). Construction equipment would be serviced regularly and operated 
in accordance with local, State, and Federal emission requirements 
(STPNOC 2009). Emissions from activities associated with installation 
of the CFRWs would vary based on the level and duration of the specific 
activity, but the overall impact on air quality is expected to be 
temporary and limited in magnitude. The staff concludes that the 
proposed action would not significantly contribute to air quality 
impacts at the STP site.

Nonradiological Health Impacts

    Nonradiological health impacts to the public and workers from the 
proposed action would include exposure to fugitive dust, and vehicle 
and construction equipment exhaust, occupational injuries, and noise; 
as well as the transport of materials and personnel to and from the STP 
site. Adherence to Federal and State regulations regarding air quality, 
construction worker health, and noise would minimize nonradiological 
health impacts. Mitigation measures, such as operational controls and 
practices, worker training, use of personal protective equipment, and 
fugitive dust and exhaust emissions control measures, would further 
reduce impacts from the proposed action. Based on the number of 
shipments of building materials and the number of workers that would be 
transported to the STP site for site preparation and construction 
activities (STPNOC 2009), the staff concludes that nonradiological 
health impacts from transportation associated with installing the CFRWs 
would be minimal. STPNOC has estimated that 75 workers would be needed 
to install the CFRWs (STPNOC 2010). This would be a small fraction of 
the 2,400 workers needed during peak preconstruction activities. 
Accordingly, the staff concludes that nonradiological health impacts 
from the proposed action would not be significant.

Nonradioactive Waste Impacts

    Nonradioactive waste impacts from the proposed action include 
impacts to land, water, and air from storage of excavated material, 
runoff to ditches and wetlands, and emissions from vehicles and 
construction equipment. Excavated materials would be stored onsite in 
borrow or spoil areas not to exceed 240 ac for the entire STP Units 3 
and 4 project (STPNOC 2009). Surface water runoff from development 
activities would be controlled by implementation of a SWPPP (STPNOC 
2010). Regulated practices for managing air emissions from construction 
equipment and temporary stationary sources, BMPs for controlling 
fugitive dust, and vehicle inspection and traffic management plans, 
would minimize impacts to air. With the above controls

[[Page 67787]]

in place, the staff concludes that impacts of nonradioactive waste from 
the proposed action would not be significant.

Socioeconomic Impacts and Environmental Justice

    Potential socioeconomic impacts due to the proposed action include 
physical impacts such as transportation, aesthetics, and air quality, 
and social impacts including demographics, economy, infrastructure, and 
community services. In its exemption request (STPNOC 2010), STPNOC 
stated that 75 workers would be needed to install the CFRWs. The peak 
number of workers required for preconstruction activities at the STP 
site would be 2,400 (STPNOC 2009). The proposed action would occur 
concurrently with other preconstruction activities, and therefore would 
not significantly affect the size of the STP Units 3 and 4 labor force. 
Given the small number of workers involved in installation of the 
CFRWs, the staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not have 
measurable socioeconomic impacts.
    With regard to environmental justice, due to the lack of 
significant environmental impacts resulting from the proposed action, 
the staff concludes that the proposed exemption would not have 
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority and low-income 
populations in the vicinity of the STP site.

Summary

    Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that granting the 
proposed exemption that would permit installation of the CFRWs prior to 
the issuance of COLs would not result in significant changes in 
nonradiological impacts to land use, surface and groundwater resources, 
terrestrial and aquatic resources, threatened and endangered species, 
socioeconomic factors and environmental justice, cultural and historic 
resources, air quality, nonradiological human health, and 
nonradioactive waste.

Radiological Impacts

Radiological Health Impacts

    Sources of radiation exposure from existing STP Units 1 and 2 for 
construction workers include exposure from direct radiation and liquid 
and gaseous radiological effluents (STPNOC 2009). In support of the 
environmental review for the COL application, NRC staff estimated the 
annual direct dose to a construction worker would be approximately 10 
millirem (mrem), assuming 2,080 hours worked at the STP site per year 
(NRC 2010c). The maximum radiological dose to construction workers from 
gaseous and liquid pathways combined would be approximately 9 mrem. 
Therefore, the estimated annual dose to construction workers would be 
approximately 19 mrem based on an occupancy of 2,080 hours per year 
(STPNOC 2009), which is less than the 100 mrem annual dose limit to an 
individual member of public found in 10 CFR 20.1301. As such, the staff 
concludes that radiological impacts to construction workers as a result 
of the proposed action would be minimal. Accordingly, the staff 
concludes that there would be no significant radiological health 
impacts associated with the proposed exemption.

Summary

    Based on the foregoing, the staff concludes that granting the 
proposed exemption that would permit installation of the CFRWs prior to 
the issuance of COLs would not result in a significant increase in 
occupational radiation exposure. The staff concludes that there would 
be no significant radiological health impacts associated with the 
proposed exemption.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered 
denial of the proposed exemption (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
If NRC were to deny the exemption request, STPNOC would not be allowed 
to install the CFRWs before the COLs are issued, and would need to wait 
until a decision is made on its COL application before installing the 
CFRWs. Denial of the exemption request would avoid the environmental 
impacts discussed in this EA, unless NRC grants the COLs, in which case 
the impacts would be incurred but they would be delayed until issuance 
of the COLs.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The NRC staff consulted with a number of Federal, State, regional, 
Tribal, and local organizations regarding the environmental impacts of 
granting the COLs for proposed STP Units 3 and 4, which includes the 
environmental impacts of installation of CFRWs and other construction 
activities. A complete list of organizations contacted can be found in 
Appendix B of the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for COLs 
for STP Units 3 and 4 (NRC 2010c). A partial list of Federal and State 
agencies contacted includes: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
(Region 6 and headquarters); National Marine Fisheries Service; U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service; Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; 
Texas Historical Commission; Texas Parks and Wildlife Department; and 
Texas State Historic Preservation Office. Comments from these agencies 
regarding the overall COLs action were incorporated into the DEIS, and 
if they were applicable to construction activities similar to 
installation of the CFRWs, they have been included in this EA.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC staff has prepared this EA for the proposed action. On the 
basis of this EA, the NRC staff has determined that there would be no 
significant environmental impacts associated with granting the 
exemption, and an environmental impact statement need not be prepared.

Additional Information

    STPNOC's exemption request is available electronically at the NRC's 
Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. 
From this site, you can access the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access 
and Management System (ADAMS). The ADAMS accession number for the 
exemption request is ML100880055. The ADAMS accession number for the EA 
is ML101580541. The ADAMS accession number for the DEIS for STP Units 3 
and 4 (NUREG-1937, Vols. 1 and 2) is ML100700576. If you do not have 
access to ADAMS or have problems accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room Reference staff at 1-800-
397-4209, or 301-415-4737, or via e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 27th day of October, 2010.

    For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Scott Flanders,
Division Director, Division of Site and Environmental Reviews, Office 
of New Reactors.

References

STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2006. Letter from S. 
Dannhardt, STPNOC, to B. Martin, Texas Historical Commission, dated 
December 12, 2006, ``Subject: South Texas Projects Units 3 and 4.'' 
ADAMS Accession No. ML092100145.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2008. Letter from M. 
McBurnett, STPNOC, to NRC, dated June 9, 2008, ``Cultural or 
Historical Artifact Discovery During Construction.'' ADAMS Accession 
No. ML081640213.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2009. South Texas Project 
Units 3 and 4 Combined License Application, Part 3, Environmental 
Report. Revision 3, Bay

[[Page 67788]]

City, Texas. ADAMS Accession No. ML092931600.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2010a. Letter from M. 
McBurnett, STPNOC, to NRC, dated March 23, 2010, ``Request for 
Exemption to Authorize Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining 
Walls.'' ADAMS Accession No. ML100880055.
STP Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC). 2010b. Letter from Scott 
Head, STPNOC, to NRC, dated July 21, 2010, ``Revised Request for 
Exemption to Authorize Installation of Crane Foundation Retaining 
Walls.'' ADAMS Accession No. ML102070274.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2000. Environmental 
Standard Review Plan--Review Plans for Environmental Reviews for 
Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG-1555, Washington, DC Includes 2007 
updates.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010a. Letter from M. 
Johnson, NRC, to M. McBurnett, STPNOC, dated January 8, 2010, 
``South Texas Project Nuclear Power Plant Units 3 and 4 Request for 
a Limited Work Authorization for Installation of Crane Foundation 
Retaining Walls.'' ADAMS Accession No. ML093350744.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010b. Letter from R. 
Whited, NRC, to M. Wolfe, Texas Historical Commission, dated March 
19, 2010, ``Section 106 Consultation and Notification of the 
Issuance of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the South 
Texas Projects, Units 3 and 4, Combined License Application Review. 
ADAMS Accession No. ML100490740.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 2010c. Draft Environmental 
Impact Statement for Combined Licenses (COLs) for South Texas 
Project Electric Generating Station, Units 3 and 4. NUREG-1937, Vol. 
1 and 2, Washington, DC Accession No. ML100700576.

[FR Doc. 2010-27764 Filed 11-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P