Southern Nuclear Operating Company Inc. Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 69137-69138 [2010-28400]

Download as PDF emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Notices significantly affect plant safety and would not significantly affect the probability of an accident. The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological hazard beyond those hazards previously analyzed in the environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact made by the Commission in promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR part 73 as discussed in a Federal Register notice dated March 27, 2009; 74 FR 13926. There will be no change to radioactive effluents or emissions that affect radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. Therefore, no radiological impacts are expected as a result of the proposed exemption. The proposed action is an extension of the compliance deadline and will not result in any additional construction or major renovation of any buildings or structures, nor any ground disturbing activities, beyond the security improvements previously planned to achieve compliance with the new rule. No changes in the size of the workforce, or in traffic to or around SONGS 2 and 3, are expected as a result of an extension of the compliance deadline. Providing the licensee with additional time to comply with the revised requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 would not alter land use, air quality, and water use (quality and quantity) conditions or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits at SONGS 2 and 3. Aquatic and terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant; threatened, endangered, and protected species under the Endangered Species Act; and essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act would not be affected. In addition, historic and cultural resources, socioeconomic conditions, and minority- and lowincome populations in the vicinity of SONGS 2 and 3 would also not be affected by this action. Therefore, no changes to or different types of nonradiological environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed exemption. As previously noted, in promulgating its amendments to 10 CFR part 73, the Commission prepared an environmental assessment of the rule change and published a finding of no significant impact (10 CFR parts 50, 52, 72, and 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, March 27, 2009; 74 FR 13926). Thus, through the proposed action, the Commission would be granting additional time for the licensee to comply with regulatory requirements for which the Commission has already found no significant impact. VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:25 Nov 09, 2010 Jkt 223001 For the foregoing reasons, the NRC concludes that there would be no significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the extension of the implementation date for one element of the new requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 for SONGS 2 and 3. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the exemption request would result in no change in current environmental impacts. Denial of the exemption request would result in the licensee being in non-compliance with 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1) and thus, subject to NRC enforcement action. The end result, however, would still be ultimate licensee compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, but with the added expense to both the NRC and the licensee of any enforcement actions. The NRC concludes that the environmental impacts of the proposed exemption and the ‘‘no action’’ alternative are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The proposed action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for SONGS Units 2 and 3, dated May 12, 1981. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on October 22, 2010, the NRC staff consulted with the California State official, Mr. Stephen Hsu of the California Department of Public Health, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Finding of No Significant Impact On the basis of the above environmental assessment, which in accordance with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), is incorporated into this finding of no significant impact by reference, the NRC concludes that the proposed action constitutes an administrative change (timing) that would 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 August 24, 2010, as supplemented by letter dated October 17, 2010. Portions of the August 24 and October 17, 2010, submittals contain safeguards PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 69137 and security-related information and, accordingly, redacted versions of those letters are available for public review in the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), at Accession Nos. ML102380401 and ML102920691, respectively. These 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 O– 1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site: http:// www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR Reference staff by telephone at 1–800– 397–4209 or 301–415–4737, or send an e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, November 3, 2010. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. James R. Hall, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2010–28395 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–366; NRC–2010–0345] Southern Nuclear Operating Company Inc. Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 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), Section 50.46, ‘‘Acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems for light-water nuclear power reactors,’’ and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, ‘‘ECCS Evaluation Models,’’ for the Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF–5, issued to Southern Nuclear Company (SNC, the licensee), for operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP), Unit 2, located in Appling County, Georgia. In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this exemption. Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate. E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1 69138 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Notices Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would allow SNC to use GNF–Ziron (GNF—Global Nuclear Fuel), an advanced alloy fuel cladding material for boiling-water reactors which is similar in composition to Zircaloy-2, but contains slightly higher iron content than specified in American Society for Testing and Materials B350 (ASTM B350). The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated May 12, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML101340739). emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed so that SNC can use GNF–Ziron as an advanced alloy for fuel rod cladding and other assembly structural components at the HNP. 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 GNF–Ziron alloy differs from the specifications for zircaloy or ZIRLOTM, a plant-specific exemption is required to allow the use of the GNF–Ziron alloy as a cladding material or in other assembly structural components at the HNP. 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 use GNF–Ziron 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 proposed action would not result in an increased radiological hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the 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 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 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:25 Nov 09, 2010 Jkt 223001 protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the MagnusonSteven’s Act are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality. There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There would be no noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the region. Therefore, no changes to 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. The details of the NRC staff’s safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation, if granted. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ alternative). Denial of the exemption 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 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, dated 1978 and the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Regarding Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2— Final Report (NUREG–1437, Supplement 4) dated May 2001 (ADAMS Accession No. ML011420057) Agencies and Persons Consulted Further Information Documents related to this action, including the application for an exemption and license amendment and supporting documentation, are 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 Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of NRC’s public documents. The ADAMS accession number for the document related to this notice, ‘‘Edwin I. Hatch, Unit 2 Proposed Exemption from Fuel Cladding Material Requirements in 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR Appendix K,’’ dated May 12, 2010, including non-proprietary publically available versions of its enclosures, is ML101340739. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737 or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The document may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR), O 1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, November 2, 2010. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Robert E. Martin, Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II–1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2010–28400 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–133; NRC–2010–0346] In accordance with its stated policy, on October 25, 2010, the staff consulted with the Georgia State official, Mr. Jim Hardeman of the Department of Natural Resources, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Exemption of Material for Proposed Disposal Procedures for the Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3, License DPR–007, Eureka, CA Finding of No Significant Impact AGENCY: 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. PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. John Hickman, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E:\FR\FM\10NON1.SGM 10NON1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 217 (Wednesday, November 10, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69137-69138]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28400]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 [Docket No. 50-366; NRC-2010-0345]


Southern Nuclear Operating Company Inc. Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear 
Plant, Unit No. 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), Section 50.46, ``Acceptance criteria for 
emergency core cooling systems for light-water nuclear power 
reactors,'' and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K, ``ECCS Evaluation Models,'' 
for the Renewed Facility Operating License No. NPF-5, issued to 
Southern Nuclear Company (SNC, the licensee), for operation of the 
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP), Unit 2, located in Appling County, 
Georgia. In accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 51, the NRC 
has prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this 
exemption. Based on the EA, the NRC has concluded that a Finding of No 
Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate.

[[Page 69138]]

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would allow SNC to use GNF-Ziron (GNF--Global 
Nuclear Fuel), an advanced alloy fuel cladding material for boiling-
water reactors which is similar in composition to Zircaloy-2, but 
contains slightly higher iron content than specified in American 
Society for Testing and Materials B350 (ASTM B350). The proposed action 
is in accordance with the licensee's application dated May 12, 2010 
(Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession 
No. ML101340739).

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed so that SNC can use GNF-Ziron as an 
advanced alloy for fuel rod cladding and other assembly structural 
components at the HNP.
    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 GNF-Ziron 
alloy differs from the specifications for zircaloy or 
ZIRLOTM, a plant-specific exemption is required to allow the 
use of the GNF-Ziron alloy as a cladding material or in other assembly 
structural components at the HNP.

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 use GNF-
Ziron 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 proposed action would not result in an increased radiological 
hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the 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 exemption.
    The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water 
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-
radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge 
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or 
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to threatened, 
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or 
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Steven's Act 
are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality.
    There are no impacts to historical and cultural resources. There 
would be no noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the 
region. Therefore, no changes to 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. The details 
of the NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption 
that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the 
exemption to the regulation, if granted.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the exemption 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 Edwin I. 
Hatch Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, dated 1978 and the Generic 
Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: 
Regarding Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2--Final Report 
(NUREG-1437, Supplement 4) dated May 2001 (ADAMS Accession No. 
ML011420057)

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on October 25, 2010, the 
staff consulted with the Georgia State official, Mr. Jim Hardeman of 
the Department of Natural Resources, 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

    Documents related to this action, including the application for an 
exemption and license amendment and supporting documentation, are 
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 Document Access and Management System (ADAMS), which 
provides text and image files of NRC's public documents. The ADAMS 
accession number for the document related to this notice, ``Edwin I. 
Hatch, Unit 2 Proposed Exemption from Fuel Cladding Material 
Requirements in 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 CFR Appendix K,'' dated May 12, 
2010, including non-proprietary publically available versions of its 
enclosures, is ML101340739. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if 
there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact 
the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 
301-415-4737 or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.
    The document may also be viewed electronically on the public 
computers located at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), O 1 F21, One 
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 
reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, November 2, 2010.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert E. Martin,
Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch II-1, Division of 
Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-28400 Filed 11-9-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P