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, https://
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 https://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 https://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2006/
nasdletter101306-iardfee.pdf, https://www.sec.gov/
advisers to file applications and other
documents through an entity designated rules/other/2008/finraletter101008-iardfees.pdf,
and https://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, https://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