Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station; Environmental Assessment And Finding of No Significant Impact, 76498-76499 [2010-30862]

Download as PDF 76498 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Notices for NFS Exemption,’’ November 15, 2010, ADAMS Accession No. ML103200288. Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of December 2010. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Merritt Baker, Acting Chief, Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. [FR Doc. 2010–30860 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket No. 50–346; NRC–2010–0378] Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station; Environmental Assessment And Finding of No Significant Impact The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, or the Commission) is considering issuance of an Exemption, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.12, ‘‘Specific Exemptions,’’ from 10 CFR 50.61, ‘‘Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events’’ and from 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G, ‘‘Fracture Toughness Requirements’’ for Facility Operating License No. NPF–3, issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC, the licensee), for operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 (DBNPS), located in Ottawa County, Ohio. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental assessment documenting its findings. The NRC concluded that the proposed actions will have no significant environmental impact. Environmental Assessment jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES Identification of the Proposed Action Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, Appendix G requires that fracture toughness requirements for ferritic materials of pressure-retaining components of the reactor coolant pressure boundary of light-water nuclear power reactors provide adequate margins of safety during any condition of normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences and system hydrostatic tests, to which the pressure boundary may be subjected over its service lifetime, section 50.61 provides fracture toughness requirements for protection against pressurized thermal shock (PTS) events. By letter dated April 15, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Dec 07, 2010 Jkt 223001 (ADAMS) Accession No. ML091130228), as supplemented by letter dated December 18, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093570103), and October 8, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102861221), FENOC proposed exemptions from the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G and 10 CFR 50.61, to revise certain DBNPS reactor pressure vessel (RPV) initial (unirradiated) properties using Framatome Advanced Nuclear Power Topical Report BAW–2308, Revisions 1–A and 2–A, ‘‘Initial RTNDT of Linde 80 Weld Materials.’’ The licensee requested an exemption from Appendix G to 10 CFR part 50 to replace the required use of the existing Charpy V-notch (Cv) and drop weightbased methodology and allow the use of an alternate methodology to incorporate the use of fracture toughness test data for evaluating the integrity of the DBNPS RPV circumferential beltline welds based on the use of the 1997 and 2002 editions of American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Test Method E 1921, ‘‘Standard Test Method for Determination of Reference Temperature T0, for Ferritic Steels in the Transition Range,’’ and American Society for Mechanical Engineering Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME B&PV Code), Code Case N–629, ‘‘Use of Fracture Toughness Test Data to establish Reference Temperature for Pressure Retaining materials of Section III, Division 1, Class 1.’’ The exemption is required since Appendix G to 10 CFR part 50, through reference to Appendix G to Section XI of the ASME Code pursuant to 10 CFR 50.55(a), requires the use of a methodology based on Cv and drop weight data. The licensee also requested an exemption from 10 CFR 50.61 to use an alternate methodology to allow the use of fracture toughness test data for evaluating the integrity of the DBNPS RPV circumferential beltline welds based on the use of the 1997 and 2002 editions of ASTM E 1921 and ASME Code Case N–629. The exemption is required since the methodology for evaluating RPV material fracture toughness in 10 CFR 50.61 requires the use of the Cv and drop weight data for establishing the PTS reference temperature (RTPTS). The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated April 15, 2009, as supplemented by letters dated December 18, 2009, August 26 and October 8, 2010. The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed to allow the licensee to use an alternate method, as described in Topical Report PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 BAW–2308, Revisions 1–A and 2–A, ‘‘Initial RTNDT of Linde 80 Weld Materials’’ for determining the initial, unirradiated material reference temperatures of the Linde 80 weld materials present in the beltline region of the DBNPS RPV. This action, by being exempted from 10 CFR 50.61 would allow the licensee to revise its pressurized thermal shock reference temperature values in the future. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed exemption. The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action to allow an alternate method for determining the initial, unirradiated material reference temperatures of the Linde 80 weld materials present in the beltline region of the DBNPS RPV 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 Final Safety Analysis Report for DBNPS. 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. There will be no change to radioactive effluents that effect radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. The proposed action does not involve a change to plant buildings or land areas on the DBNPS site. 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 or the plant, or to threatened, endangered, or 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 impact to socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no changes to or different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are expected as a result of the proposed exemption. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. E:\FR\FM\08DEN1.SGM 08DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 235 / Wednesday, December 8, 2010 / Notices Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’ alternative). Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the ‘‘no-action’’ 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, NUREG–75/ 097, dated October 1975, for DBNPS. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on October 22, 2010, the staff consulted with the Ohio State official, Ms. Carol O’Claire of the Ohio Emergency Management Agency, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES 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. For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee’s letter dated April 15, 2009. 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 29th day of November 2010. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Michael Mahoney, Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III– 2, Division of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. (‘‘FINRA’’) as the operator of the Investment Adviser Registration Depository (‘‘IARD’’) system. At the same time, the Commission approved, as reasonable, filing fees.2 The Commission later required advisers [FR Doc. 2010–30862 Filed 12–7–10; 8:45 am] registered or registering with the SEC to BILLING CODE 7590–01–P file Form ADV through the IARD.3 Over 11,000 advisers currently use the IARD system to register with the SEC and SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE make state notice filings electronically COMMISSION through the Internet. [Release No. IA–3119; File No. S7–38–10] Commission staff, representatives of the North American Securities Approval of Investment Adviser Administrators Association, Inc. Registration Depository Filing Fees (‘‘NASAA’’),4 and representatives of FINRA periodically hold discussions on AGENCY: Securities and Exchange IARD system finances. In the early years Commission. of operations, SEC-associated IARD ACTION: Notice of intent to charge revenues exceeded projections while revised IARD filing fees for advisers SEC-associated IARD expenses were registering with or registered with the lower than estimated, resulting in a Commission. surplus. In 2005, FINRA wrote a letter SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange to SEC staff recommending a waiver of Commission (‘‘Commission’’ or ‘‘SEC’’) is annual fees for a one-year period.5 The revising Investment Adviser Commission concluded that this was Registration Depository annual and appropriate and waived annual fees.6 In initial filing fees that will be charged 2006, 2008, and 2009 FINRA wrote to beginning January 1, 2011. the staff again, recommending a twoHearing or Notification of Hearing: An year, a nine-month, and a five-month order approving the IARD filing fees waiver, respectively, of all fees to will be issued unless the Commission continue to reduce the surplus.7 The orders a hearing. Interested persons may Commission agreed and issued orders request a hearing by writing to the waiving all IARD fees.8 At the Commission’s Secretary. Hearing conclusion of the 2009 waiver, FINRA requests should be received by the SEC wrote to the staff again, recommending by 5:30 p.m. on December 21, 2010. reduced levels of fees be charged in Hearing requests should state the nature 2 Designation of NASD Regulation, Inc., to of the writer’s interest, the reason for the Establish and Maintain the Investment Adviser request, and the issues contested. Registration Depository; Approval of IARD Fees, Persons may request notification of a Investment Advisers Act Release No. 1888 (July 28, hearing by writing to the Commission’s 2000) [65 FR 47807 (Aug. 3, 2000)]. FINRA was Secretary. formerly known as NASD. 3 Electronic Filing by Investment Advisers; ADDRESSES: Elizabeth M. Murphy, Amendments to Form ADV, Investment Advisers Secretary, Securities and Exchange Act Release No. 1897 (Sept. 12, 2000) [65 FR 57438 Commission, 100 F Street, NE., (Sept. 22, 2000)]. 4 The IARD system is used by both advisers Washington, DC 20549–1090. registering or registered with the SEC and advisers FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: registered or registering with one or more state Keith Kanyan, IARD System Manager, at securities authorities. NASAA represents the state 202–551–6737, or Iarules@sec.gov, securities administrators in setting IARD filing fees for state-registered advisers. Office of Investment Adviser 5 NASD letter dated September 9, 2005, available Regulation, Division of Investment at http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/ Management, Securities and Exchange nasdlet090905.pdf. Commission, 100 F Street, NE., 6 Approval of Investment Adviser Registration Washington, DC 20549–8549. Depository Filing Fees, Investment Advisers Act Release No. 2439 (Oct. 7, 2005) [70 FR 59789 (Oct. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 13, 2005)]. 204(b) of the Investment Advisers Act of 7 NASD letter dated October 13, 2006 and FINRA 1940 (‘‘Advisers Act’’) authorizes the letters dated October 10, 2008 and July 8, 2009 Commission to require investment available at http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2006/ nasdletter101306-iardfee.pdf, http://www.sec.gov/ advisers to file applications and other documents through an entity designated rules/other/2008/finraletter101008-iardfees.pdf, and http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2009/ by the Commission, and to pay finraletter070809-iardfees.pdf, respectively. 8 Approval of Investment Adviser Registration reasonable costs associated with such Depository Filing Fees, Investment Advisers Act filings.1 In 2000, the Commission Release No. 2564 (Oct. 26, 2006), Investment designated the Financial Industry Advisers Act Release No. 2806 (Oct. 30, 2008) [73 Regulatory Authority Regulation, Inc. FR 65900 (Nov. 5. 2008)], and Investment Advisers 1 15 VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:23 Dec 07, 2010 Jkt 223001 76499 PO 00000 Act Release No. 2909 (July 31, 2009) [74 FR 39352 (Aug. 6, 2009)]. U.S.C. 80b–4(b). Frm 00107 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\08DEN1.SGM 08DEN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 235 (Wednesday, December 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 76498-76499]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-30862]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-346; NRC-2010-0378]


Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 
Station; Environmental Assessment And Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC, or the Commission) is 
considering issuance of an Exemption, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code 
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.12, ``Specific Exemptions,'' 
from 10 CFR 50.61, ``Fracture Toughness Requirements for Protection 
Against Pressurized Thermal Shock Events'' and from 10 CFR part 50, 
Appendix G, ``Fracture Toughness Requirements'' for Facility Operating 
License No. NPF-3, issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company 
(FENOC, the licensee), for operation of the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power 
Station, Unit 1 (DBNPS), located in Ottawa County, Ohio. In accordance 
with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC performed an environmental assessment 
documenting its findings. The NRC concluded that the proposed actions 
will have no significant environmental impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Part 50, 
Appendix G requires that fracture toughness requirements for ferritic 
materials of pressure-retaining components of the reactor coolant 
pressure boundary of light-water nuclear power reactors provide 
adequate margins of safety during any condition of normal operation, 
including anticipated operational occurrences and system hydrostatic 
tests, to which the pressure boundary may be subjected over its service 
lifetime, section 50.61 provides fracture toughness requirements for 
protection against pressurized thermal shock (PTS) events. By letter 
dated April 15, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System 
(ADAMS) Accession No. ML091130228), as supplemented by letter dated 
December 18, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093570103), and October 8, 
2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML102861221), FENOC proposed exemptions from 
the requirements of 10 CFR part 50, Appendix G and 10 CFR 50.61, to 
revise certain DBNPS reactor pressure vessel (RPV) initial 
(unirradiated) properties using Framatome Advanced Nuclear Power 
Topical Report BAW-2308, Revisions 1-A and 2-A, ``Initial 
RTNDT of Linde 80 Weld Materials.''
    The licensee requested an exemption from Appendix G to 10 CFR part 
50 to replace the required use of the existing Charpy V-notch 
(Cv) and drop weight-based methodology and allow the use of 
an alternate methodology to incorporate the use of fracture toughness 
test data for evaluating the integrity of the DBNPS RPV circumferential 
beltline welds based on the use of the 1997 and 2002 editions of 
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Test Method 
E 1921, ``Standard Test Method for Determination of Reference 
Temperature T0, for Ferritic Steels in the Transition 
Range,'' and American Society for Mechanical Engineering Boiler and 
Pressure Vessel Code (ASME B&PV Code), Code Case N-629, ``Use of 
Fracture Toughness Test Data to establish Reference Temperature for 
Pressure Retaining materials of Section III, Division 1, Class 1.'' The 
exemption is required since Appendix G to 10 CFR part 50, through 
reference to Appendix G to Section XI of the ASME Code pursuant to 10 
CFR 50.55(a), requires the use of a methodology based on Cv 
and drop weight data.
    The licensee also requested an exemption from 10 CFR 50.61 to use 
an alternate methodology to allow the use of fracture toughness test 
data for evaluating the integrity of the DBNPS RPV circumferential 
beltline welds based on the use of the 1997 and 2002 editions of ASTM E 
1921 and ASME Code Case N-629. The exemption is required since the 
methodology for evaluating RPV material fracture toughness in 10 CFR 
50.61 requires the use of the Cv and drop weight data for 
establishing the PTS reference temperature (RTPTS).
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated April 15, 2009, as supplemented by letters dated 
December 18, 2009, August 26 and October 8, 2010.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to allow the licensee to use an 
alternate method, as described in Topical Report BAW-2308, Revisions 1-
A and 2-A, ``Initial RTNDT of Linde 80 Weld Materials'' for 
determining the initial, unirradiated material reference temperatures 
of the Linde 80 weld materials present in the beltline region of the 
DBNPS RPV. This action, by being exempted from 10 CFR 50.61 would allow 
the licensee to revise its pressurized thermal shock reference 
temperature values in the future.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed exemption. The 
NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action to allow an alternate 
method for determining the initial, unirradiated material reference 
temperatures of the Linde 80 weld materials present in the beltline 
region of the DBNPS RPV 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 
Final Safety Analysis Report for DBNPS.
    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.
    There will be no change to radioactive effluents that effect 
radiation exposures to plant workers and members of the public. The 
proposed action does not involve a change to plant buildings or land 
areas on the DBNPS site. 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 or 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 impact to socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no changes to 
or different types of non-radiological environmental impacts are 
expected as a result of the proposed exemption.
    Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

[[Page 76499]]

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered 
denial of the proposed action (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the application would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action 
and the ``no-action'' 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, 
NUREG-75/097, dated October 1975, for DBNPS.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on October 22, 2010, the 
staff consulted with the Ohio State official, Ms. Carol O'Claire of the 
Ohio Emergency Management Agency, 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.
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated April 15, 2009. 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 29th day of November 2010.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael Mahoney,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch III-2, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-30862 Filed 12-7-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P