Virginia Electric and Power Company North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact, 76495-76496 [2010-30855]

Download as PDF Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Notices particularly interested in comments which: • Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; • Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; • Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and • Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses. ADDRESSES: Sunil Iyengar, National Endowment for the Arts, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 616, Washington, DC 20506–0001, telephone (202) 682–5424 (this is not a toll-free number), fax (202) 682–5677. Kathy Plowitz-Worden, Office of Guidelines and Panel Operations, National Endowment for the Arts. [FR Doc. 2010–30758 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7537–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50–338 and 50–339; Docket Nos. 50–280 and 50–281; NRC–2010–0376] jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Virginia Electric and Power Company North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering changes to the Emergency Plan, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54, ‘‘Conditions of licenses,’’ paragraph (q), for North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (NAPS), for Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF–4 and NPF–7, and Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Surry) for Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–32 and DPR–37, issued to Virginia Electric and Power Company (the licensee), for operation of NAPS and Surry located in Louisa County, Virginia, and Surry County, Virginia, respectively. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental assessment. Based on the results of the VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Dec 07, 2010 Jkt 223001 environmental assessment, the NRC is issuing a finding of no significant impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would upgrade selected Emergency Action Levels (EALs) based on NEI 99–01, Revision 5, ‘‘Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels,’’ using the guidance of NRC Regulatory Issue Summary 2003–18, Supplement 1 and 2, ‘‘Use of Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 99–01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels.’’ The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s applications dated January 29, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML100500566). The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed because amendments would change an EAL scheme based on NUREG–0654, ‘‘Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plan and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants,’’ to one based on NEI 99–01, ‘‘Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels,’’ Revision 4. This would change the methodology for deriving selected Notification of Unusual Event values in Table R–1, Gaseous Effluent Monitor Classification Thresholds, and deleting EAL RA2.4, which evaluates abnormal radiation readings at infrequently accessed areas and revise the radiation level threshold values for reactor coolant system (RCS) letdown indication. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed EAL changes to NAPS and Surry. The staff has concluded that the changes would not significantly affect plant safety and would not have a significant adverse effect on the probability of an accident occurring. The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report. There will be no change to radioactive effluents that affect radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. No changes will be made to plant buildings or the site property. Therefore, no changes or different types of radiological impacts are expected as a result of the proposed changes. The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water use, or PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 76495 result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to threatened, endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the MagnusonStevens Act are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality. There are no impacts to historic and cultural resources. There would be no noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the region. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar. Alternative Use of Resources The action does not involve the use of any different resources than those previously considered in the ‘‘Final Environmental Statement Related to the Continuation of Construction and the Operation,’’ for NAPS dated April 1973, and Surry dated May 1972 and June 1972, respectively, as supplemented through the ‘‘Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplements 6 and 7 Regarding Surry and NAPS—Final Report (NUREG–1437, Supplements 6 and 7),’’ dated November 2002. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on November 17, 2010, the staff consulted with the Virginia State official, Leslie P. Foldesi, Director of the Division of Radiological 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 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. E:\FR\FM\08DEN1.SGM 08DEN1 76496 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Notices For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee’s letters dated January 29, 2010. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (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, this 1st day of December 2010. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. V. Sreenivas, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 2– 1, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. [FR Doc. 2010–30855 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 70–143; NRC–2010–0379] Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Proposed Exemption From a Requirement To Measure the Uranium Element and Isotopic Content of Special Nuclear Material Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. AGENCY: jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin M. Ramsey, Project Manager, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop EBB–2C40M, Rockville, MD 20555–0001, Telephone (301) 492–3123, Fax (301) 492–3359, E-mail kevin.ramsey@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) staff is considering the issuance of a license amendment to Materials License SNM–124 to Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS or the licensee) VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Dec 07, 2010 Jkt 223001 that would reflect a requested one-time exemption from a requirement to measure the uranium element and isotopic content of certain small amounts of strategic special nuclear material, as described further below. The NRC regulations in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 74.59(d)(1) state that a licensee must establish and maintain a system of measurements to substantiate such contents. By letter dated December 31, 2009, NFS requested a temporary exemption from this requirement. The NRC prepared an Environmental Assessment (EA) in support of this exemption request in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC concluded that a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) is appropriate; therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will not be prepared. II. Environmental Assessment Background The NFS facility in Erwin, Tennessee is authorized, under License SNM–124 to manufacture high-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. In addition, NFS is authorized to blend highly enriched uranium with natural uranium and manufacture low-enriched nuclear reactor fuel. The U.S. Department of Energy contracted with NFS to retain no more than 30, 2S type uranium hexafluoride (UF6) cylinders for future forensic analysis. These cylinders have been opened and processed leaving a small quantity of material (heel) in each cylinder. Because of the trace condition of heel material, it is difficult to perform destructive or nondestructive analyses to measure the uranium element and isotope content of the material remaining in these cylinders. It requires expensive equipment, which NFS does not possess, to sample and analyze UF6 gas. Therefore, NFS is requesting a onetime exemption to allow the use of assigned values for each cylinder based on the net weight of the heel, and concentration and enrichment factors. These assigned values will be used for inventory, receipt and shipment practices. Review Scope The purpose of this EA is to assess the environmental impacts of granting the requested exemption. This EA does not approve the request—a separate safety review determines whether to grant the requested exemption. This EA is limited to the proposed exemption and any cumulative impacts on existing plant operations. The existing conditions and operations for the Erwin facility were PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 evaluated by NRC for environmental impacts in a 1999 EA related to the renewal of the NFS license (Reference 1) and a 2002 EA related to the first amendment for the Blended LowEnriched Uranium (BLEU) Project (Reference 2). The 2002 EA assessed the impact of the entire BLEU Project using information available at that time. A 2003 EA (Reference 3) and a 2004 EA (Reference 4), related to additional BLEU Project amendments, confirmed the FONSI issued in 2002. Proposed Action The proposed action is to grant a onetime exemption from the 10 CFR 74.59(d)(1) requirement to measure the uranium element and isotopic content of certain 2S type UF6 cylinders. The exemption would authorize NFS to record an estimated value instead of drawing samples from each cylinder and conducting measurements. No change to processing, packaging, or storage operations is requested; and no construction of new facilities is requested. Granting the exemption would require the revision of a safety condition and the addition of a safeguards condition in License SNM– 124 if the exemption is granted. Need for Proposed Action The proposed action is being requested because it is difficult to sample the small quantity of material remaining in each cylinder and perform destructive or nondestructive analyses to measure the uranium element and isotope content of the material. It requires expensive equipment, which NFS does not possess, to sample and analyze UF6 gas. Alternatives The alternatives available to NRC are: 1. Approve the requested action as described, or 2. No action (i.e., deny the request). Affected Environment The affected environment for the proposed action and the no action alternative is the NFS site. The NFS facility is located in Unicoi County, Tennessee, about 32 kilometers (20 miles) southwest of Johnson City, Tennessee. The facility is within the Erwin city limits. The affected environment is identical to the affected environment assessed in the 2002 EA related to the first amendment for the BLEU Project (Reference 2). A full description of the site and its characteristics are given in the 2002 EA. Additional information can be found in the 1999 EA related to the renewal of the NFS license (Reference 1). The site E:\FR\FM\08DEN1.SGM 08DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76495-76496]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30855]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 [Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339; Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281; NRC-
2010-0376]


Virginia Electric and Power Company North Anna Power Station, 
Unit Nos. 1 and 2 Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental 
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering changes 
to the Emergency Plan, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54, ``Conditions of 
licenses,'' paragraph (q), for North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 
and 2 (NAPS), for Renewed Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-4 and 
NPF-7, and Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (Surry) for Renewed 
Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37, issued to Virginia 
Electric and Power Company (the licensee), for operation of NAPS and 
Surry located in Louisa County, Virginia, and Surry County, Virginia, 
respectively. Therefore, as required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed 
an environmental assessment. Based on the results of the environmental 
assessment, the NRC is issuing a finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would upgrade selected Emergency Action Levels 
(EALs) based on NEI 99-01, Revision 5, ``Methodology for Development of 
Emergency Action Levels,'' using the guidance of NRC Regulatory Issue 
Summary 2003-18, Supplement 1 and 2, ``Use of Nuclear Energy Institute 
(NEI) 99-01, Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels.''
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
applications dated January 29, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and 
Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML100500566).

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed because amendments would change an 
EAL scheme based on NUREG-0654, ``Criteria for Preparation and 
Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plan and Preparedness in 
Support of Nuclear Power Plants,'' to one based on NEI 99-01, 
``Methodology for Development of Emergency Action Levels,'' Revision 4. 
This would change the methodology for deriving selected Notification of 
Unusual Event values in Table R-1, Gaseous Effluent Monitor 
Classification Thresholds, and deleting EAL RA2.4, which evaluates 
abnormal radiation readings at infrequently accessed areas and revise 
the radiation level threshold values for reactor coolant system (RCS) 
letdown indication.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed 
EAL changes to NAPS and Surry. The staff has concluded that the changes 
would not significantly affect plant safety and would not have a 
significant adverse effect on the probability of an accident occurring. 
The proposed action would not result in an increased radiological 
hazard beyond those previously analyzed in the Updated Final Safety 
Analysis Report. There will be no change to radioactive effluents that 
affect radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. 
No changes will be made to plant buildings or the site property. 
Therefore, no changes or different types of radiological impacts are 
expected as a result of the proposed changes.
    The proposed action does not result in changes to land use or water 
use, or result in changes to the quality or quantity of non-
radiological effluents. No changes to the National Pollution Discharge 
Elimination System permit are needed. No effects on the aquatic or 
terrestrial habitat in the vicinity of the plant, or to threatened, 
endangered, or protected species under the Endangered Species Act, or 
impacts to essential fish habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act 
are expected. There are no impacts to the air or ambient air quality. 
There are no impacts to historic and cultural resources. There would be 
no noticeable effect on socioeconomic conditions in the region.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the application would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action 
and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those previously considered in the ``Final Environmental Statement 
Related to the Continuation of Construction and the Operation,'' for 
NAPS dated April 1973, and Surry dated May 1972 and June 1972, 
respectively, as supplemented through the ``Generic Environmental 
Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: Supplements 6 
and 7 Regarding Surry and NAPS--Final Report (NUREG-1437, Supplements 6 
and 7),'' dated November 2002.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on November 17, 2010, the 
staff consulted with the Virginia State official, Leslie P. Foldesi, 
Director of the Division of Radiological 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 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.

[[Page 76496]]

    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letters dated January 29, 2010. Documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O1 F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 
records will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents 
Access and Management System (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, this 1st day of December 2010.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
V. Sreenivas,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch 2-1, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-30855 Filed 12-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P