Notice of Availability for the Draft Programmatic Environmental Assessment for the Development and Operation of Small-Scale Wind Energy Projects at United States Marine Corps Facilities Throughout the United States, 69649-69650 [2010-28613]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2010 / Notices
Facility Seismic Safety. The Board followed
up its Recommendation with a letter to the
Deputy Secretary of Energy on March 15,
2010, that sought to determine whether
DOE’s current interpretation of 10 CFR Part
830 and DOE Standard 3009–94 still supports
the principles of providing adequate
protection of the public, workers, and the
environment from the hazards of operating
DOE’s defense nuclear facilities. The Board’s
letter particularly expressed concern
regarding the appearance that DOE’s present
interpretation is that nuclear safety
Evaluation Guidelines established in DOE
Standard 3009–94 do not have to be met.
DOE’s June 10, 2010, response to the
Board’s letter states that DOE’s utilization
and implementation of DOE Standard 3009–
94 has not changed since issuance of 10 CFR
Part 830. DOE’s response observes that DOE
Standard 3009–94 ‘‘was not written as a
prescriptive item-by-item requirements
document; rather it provides an overall
approach and guidance for preparing a DSA.’’
DOE’s response states that the Standard
describes steps that the contractor may take
if the postulated accident consequences
cannot be mitigated below the Evaluation
Guideline. DOE’s response also cites
guidance for DOE approval authorities
contained in DOE Standard 1104–2009,
Review and Approval of Nuclear Facility
Safety Basis and Safety Design Basis
Documents, and notes that the Safety Basis
Approval Authority may prescribe interim
controls and planned improvements if the
Evaluation Guideline is exceeded. DOE’s
response closes by stating that its managers
‘‘are expected to carefully evaluate situations
that fall short of expectations and only
provide their approval of documented safety
analyses when they are satisfied that
operations can be conducted safely…, that
options to meet DOE expectations have been
evaluated, and that adequate commitments to
achieve an appropriate safety posture in a
timely manner have been made.’’
The lack of definitive statements in DOE’s
June 10, 2010, response illustrates the
difficulties inherent in applying a guidance
document as a safe harbor for implementing
the requirements of a regulation.
Furthermore, NNSA’s approval of the DSA
for the Los Alamos National Laboratory’s
Plutonium Facility in December 2008
demonstrates that, despite DOE’s stated
expectations, it is not always true that DOE’s
managers will ensure safety by imposing
conditions of approval that address
inadequacies in the safety basis. This is
illustrated to a lesser extent at the other
NNSA facilities—described in follow-up
correspondence NNSA issued to the Board
on June 30, 2010—which have not
implemented controls or compensatory
measures sufficient to reduce accident
consequences below the Evaluation
Guideline. DOE Standard 1104–2009 serves
as a source of guidance for DOE Safety Basis
Approval Authorities, but it, too, is a
guidance document, unequivocally stating,
‘‘This Standard does not add any new
requirements for DOE or its contractors.’’
DOE’s standards-based regulatory system
needs a clear and unambiguous set of nuclear
safety requirements to ensure that adequate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:04 Nov 12, 2010
Jkt 223001
protection of the public, workers, and the
environment is provided. Further, it is
imperative that DOE provide clear direction
to its Safety Basis Approval Authorities to
ensure that, if nuclear safety requirements
cannot be met prior to approval of a DSA,
DOE imposes clear conditions of approval for
compensatory measures for the short term
and facility modifications for the longer term
to achieve the required safety posture. This
acceptance of risk and commitment to future
upgrades must be approved at a level of
authority within DOE that is high enough to
control both the resources needed to
accomplish the upgrades as well as the
programmatic decision-making involved in
determining that the risk of continuing
operations is offset by sufficiently compelling
programmatic needs.
Item 4 of the Recommendation below
deserves a further word of explanation. The
Board does not recommend lightly a change
to DOE’s nuclear safety regulations. But as
explained above, DOE has chosen over the
past several years to drift away from the
principles that underlay the rule as originally
intended. The Board has chosen to
recommend a rule change because this action
would tend, in the long run, to prevent future
shifts in DOE safety policy that would once
again have to be challenged and argued
against. For these reasons, the Board
recommends that the nuclear safety rule, 10
CFR Part 830, be amended as stated below.
Recommendation
Therefore, the Board recommends that
DOE:
1. Immediately affirm the previously
understood requirement that unmitigated,
bounding-type accident scenarios will be
used at DOE’s defense nuclear facilities to
estimate dose consequences at the site
boundary, and that a sufficient combination
of structures, systems, or components must
be designated safety class to prevent
exposures at the site boundary from
approaching or exceeding 25 rem TEDE.
2. For those defense nuclear facilities that
have not implemented compensatory
measures sufficient to reduce exposures at
the site boundary below 25 rem TEDE, direct
the responsible program secretarial officer to
develop a plan to meet this requirement
within a reasonable timeframe.
3. Revise DOE Standard 3009–94 to
identify clearly and unambiguously the
requirements that must be met to
demonstrate that an adequate level of
protection for the public and workers is
provided through a DSA. This should be
accomplished, at a minimum, by:
a. Clearly defining methodologies and
providing acceptability criteria for controls,
parameters, processes, analytical tools, and
other data that should be used in preparation
of a DSA.
b. Delineating the criteria to be met for
identification and analyses of an adequate set
of Design Basis Accidents (for new facilities),
or Evaluation Basis Accidents (for existing
facilities).
c. Providing criteria that must be met by
the safety-class structures, systems, and
components to (i) mitigate the consequences
to a fraction of the Evaluation Guideline, or
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
69649
(ii) prevent the events by demonstrating an
acceptable reliability for the preventive
features.
d. Establishing a process and path forward
to meeting (a) through (c) above through
compensatory measures and planned
improvements if the DSA cannot demonstrate
compliance.
4. Amend 10 CFR Part 830 by
incorporating the revised version of DOE
Standard 3009–94 into the text as a
requirement, instead of as a safe harbor cited
in Table 2.
5. Formally establish the minimum criteria
and requirements that govern federal
approval of a DSA, by revision to DOE
Standard 1104–2009 and other appropriate
documents. The criteria and requirements
should include:
a. The authorities that can be delegated, the
required training and qualification of the
approval authority, and the boundaries and
limitations of the approval authority’s
responsibilities,
b. Actions to be taken if conditions are
beyond the specified boundaries and
limitations of the approval authority,
c. The organization or the individual who
can approve a DSA that is beyond the
delegated approval authority’s boundaries
and limitations,
d. The regulatory process that must be
followed if condition are beyond the
specified boundaries and limitations of the
approval authority, and any compensatory
actions to be taken, and
e. The criteria the approval authority must
use to quantify the acceptance of risk for
continued operations when offsite dose
consequences have not been reduced to a
small fraction of the Evaluation Guideline.
6. Formally designate the responsible
organization and identify the processes for
performing oversight to ensure that the
responsibilities identified in Item 5 above are
fully implemented.
Peter S. Winokur,
Chairman.
[FR Doc. 2010–28683 Filed 11–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3670–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Notice of Availability for the Draft
Programmatic Environmental
Assessment for the Development and
Operation of Small-Scale Wind Energy
Projects at United States Marine Corps
Facilities Throughout the United States
Department of the Navy, DoD.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
Pursuant to Section
(102)(2)(c) of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 United States Code 4321), as
implemented by the Council on
Environmental Quality regulations for
implementing the procedural provisions
of NEPA (40 Code of Federal
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
69650
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 219 / Monday, November 15, 2010 / Notices
Regulations [CFR] parts 1500–1508),
and Marine Corps NEPA directives
(Marine Corps Order P5090.2A), the
Department of the Navy announces the
availability of, and invites public
comments on the Draft Programmatic
Environmental Assessment (Draft PEA)
for the development and operation of
small-scale wind energy projects at
United States Marine Corps (USMC)
facilities throughout the Continental
United States (CONUS). A PEA
evaluates a major action on a broad,
programmatic basis. Thus, site-specific
NEPA analysis may be tiered off this
document as appropriate.
Dates and Addresses: The public
comment period begins upon
publication of a Notice of Availability
(NOA) for the Draft PEA in the Federal
Register. The 30-day public comment
period will end on December 4, 2010.
The Draft PEA is available for
electronic viewing at https://
marines.mil/unit/marforres/MFRHQ/
FACILITIES/FACILITIES.aspx, or by
sending a request to Alain Flexer,
USMC Marine Forces Reserves
(MARFORRES), by telephone 504–678–
8489, by fax 504–678–6823, by e-mail to
alain.flexer@usmc.mil or by writing to:
MARFORRES, Attn: Alain Flexer, 4400
Dauphine Street, New Orleans,
Louisiana 70146–5400.
Comments: All comments, written or
submitted via the internet, are treated
equally, become part of the public
record on the Draft PEA, and will be
considered in the Final PEA. During the
30-day comment period, all written
comments should be mailed to
MARFORRES, Attn: Alain Flexer, 4400
Dauphine Street, New Orleans, LA
70146–5400. Please submit all
comments by December 4, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
MARFORRES, Attn: Alain Flexer,
telephone 504–678–8489 or by e-mail
alain.flexer@usmc.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
MARFORRES (Energy Office) has
completed a Draft PEA for the
development and operation of smallscale wind energy projects at USMC
CONUS facilities. The USMC
considered ten priority sites at which
wind is the most readily available and
economically feasible renewable energy
source, therefore, this Draft PEA does
not consider other forms of renewable
energy.
The purpose of the proposed action is
to reduce dependency on fossil fuels
and increase energy security and
efficiency through development of
small-scale wind energy projects at
USMC CONUS facilities. The proposed
action would enable MARFORRES to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:04 Nov 12, 2010
Jkt 223001
achieve specific goals regarding energy
production and usage set by Executive
Orders, legislative acts, and Federal
agencies.
The Draft PEA evaluates the potential
environmental impacts of three action
alternatives and the No Action
Alternative. Alternative 1 involves site,
design, construct, and operate one to
four small wind turbines at USMC
facilities. Alternative 2 involves site,
design, construct, and operate one to
four medium wind turbines at USMC
facilities. Alternative 3 involves site,
design, construct, and operate one or
two large wind turbines at USMC
facilities. Under the No Action
Alternative, the USMC would not
pursue the development and operation
of small-scale wind energy projects at
USMC CONUS facilities.
Environmental resources addressed in
the Draft PEA include land use; noise;
geological resources; water resources;
biological resources; cultural resources;
visual resources; socioeconomics; air
quality; utilities; airspace; health and
safety; hazardous materials; and
transportation. The Draft PEA also
analyzes cumulative impacts from other
past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions.
Schedule: NOA of the Draft PEA will
be published in the Federal Register.
This notice initiates the 30-day public
comment period for the Draft PEA. If the
Draft PEA determines a more thorough
analysis is necessary, then the USMC
will prepare an Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS). If additional analysis is
not necessary, the USMC will issue a
Finding of No Significant Impact
(FONSI). The USMC intends to issue the
Final PEA no later than December 2010,
at which time a NOA of the FONSI or
Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS
will be published.
Dated: November 5, 2010.
D. J. Werner,
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate
Generals Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register
Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010–28613 Filed 11–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810–FF–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
[Docket ID: USA–2010–0026]
Privacy Act of 1974; System of
Records
Department of the Army, DoD.
Notice to Delete a System of
Records.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Department of the Army
is deleting a systems of record notice
from its existing inventory of record
systems subject to the Privacy Act of
1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.
SUMMARY:
This proposed action will be
effective without further notice on
December 15, 2010 unless comments are
received which result in a contrary
determination.
DATES:
You may submit comments,
identified by docket number and/or
Regulatory Information Number (RIN)
and title, by any of the following
methods:
* Federal Rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
* Mail: Federal Docket Management
System Office, Room 3C843, 1160
Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC
20301–1160.
Instructions: All submissions received
must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory
Information Number (RIN) for this
Federal Register document. The general
policy for comments and other
submissions from members of the public
is to make these submissions available
for public viewing on the Internet at
https://www.regulations.gov as they are
received without change, including any
personal identifiers or contact
information.
ADDRESSES:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Department of the Army, Privacy Office,
U.S. Army Records Management and
Declassification Agency, 7701 Telegraph
Road, Casey Building, Suite 144,
Alexandria, VA 22325–3905, Mr. Leroy
Jones at (703) 428–6185.
The
Department of the Army systems of
records notices subject to the Privacy
Act of 1974, (5 U.S.C. 552a), as
amended, have been published in the
Federal Register and are available from
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
address above.
The Department of the Army proposes
to delete one system of records notice
from its inventory of record systems
subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5
U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The proposed
deletion is not within the purview of
subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974,
(5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which
requires the submission of a new or
altered system report.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: November 9, 2010.
Morgan F. Park,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison
Officer, Department of Defense.
Deletion:
E:\FR\FM\15NON1.SGM
15NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 219 (Monday, November 15, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 69649-69650]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28613]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy
Notice of Availability for the Draft Programmatic Environmental
Assessment for the Development and Operation of Small-Scale Wind Energy
Projects at United States Marine Corps Facilities Throughout the United
States
AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DoD.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Pursuant to Section (102)(2)(c) of the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 United States Code 4321), as implemented
by the Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing
the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 Code of Federal
[[Page 69650]]
Regulations [CFR] parts 1500-1508), and Marine Corps NEPA directives
(Marine Corps Order P5090.2A), the Department of the Navy announces the
availability of, and invites public comments on the Draft Programmatic
Environmental Assessment (Draft PEA) for the development and operation
of small-scale wind energy projects at United States Marine Corps
(USMC) facilities throughout the Continental United States (CONUS). A
PEA evaluates a major action on a broad, programmatic basis. Thus,
site-specific NEPA analysis may be tiered off this document as
appropriate.
Dates and Addresses: The public comment period begins upon
publication of a Notice of Availability (NOA) for the Draft PEA in the
Federal Register. The 30-day public comment period will end on December
4, 2010.
The Draft PEA is available for electronic viewing at https://marines.mil/unit/marforres/MFRHQ/FACILITIES/FACILITIES.aspx, or by
sending a request to Alain Flexer, USMC Marine Forces Reserves
(MARFORRES), by telephone 504-678-8489, by fax 504-678-6823, by e-mail
to alain.flexer@usmc.mil or by writing to: MARFORRES, Attn: Alain
Flexer, 4400 Dauphine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana 70146-5400.
Comments: All comments, written or submitted via the internet, are
treated equally, become part of the public record on the Draft PEA, and
will be considered in the Final PEA. During the 30-day comment period,
all written comments should be mailed to MARFORRES, Attn: Alain Flexer,
4400 Dauphine Street, New Orleans, LA 70146-5400. Please submit all
comments by December 4, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: MARFORRES, Attn: Alain Flexer,
telephone 504-678-8489 or by e-mail alain.flexer@usmc.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: MARFORRES (Energy Office) has completed a
Draft PEA for the development and operation of small-scale wind energy
projects at USMC CONUS facilities. The USMC considered ten priority
sites at which wind is the most readily available and economically
feasible renewable energy source, therefore, this Draft PEA does not
consider other forms of renewable energy.
The purpose of the proposed action is to reduce dependency on
fossil fuels and increase energy security and efficiency through
development of small-scale wind energy projects at USMC CONUS
facilities. The proposed action would enable MARFORRES to achieve
specific goals regarding energy production and usage set by Executive
Orders, legislative acts, and Federal agencies.
The Draft PEA evaluates the potential environmental impacts of
three action alternatives and the No Action Alternative. Alternative 1
involves site, design, construct, and operate one to four small wind
turbines at USMC facilities. Alternative 2 involves site, design,
construct, and operate one to four medium wind turbines at USMC
facilities. Alternative 3 involves site, design, construct, and operate
one or two large wind turbines at USMC facilities. Under the No Action
Alternative, the USMC would not pursue the development and operation of
small-scale wind energy projects at USMC CONUS facilities.
Environmental resources addressed in the Draft PEA include land
use; noise; geological resources; water resources; biological
resources; cultural resources; visual resources; socioeconomics; air
quality; utilities; airspace; health and safety; hazardous materials;
and transportation. The Draft PEA also analyzes cumulative impacts from
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions.
Schedule: NOA of the Draft PEA will be published in the Federal
Register. This notice initiates the 30-day public comment period for
the Draft PEA. If the Draft PEA determines a more thorough analysis is
necessary, then the USMC will prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS). If additional analysis is not necessary, the USMC will issue a
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The USMC intends to issue the
Final PEA no later than December 2010, at which time a NOA of the FONSI
or Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS will be published.
Dated: November 5, 2010.
D. J. Werner,
Lieutenant Commander, Judge Advocate Generals Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal
Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-28613 Filed 11-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
