Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Exemption From Certain Requirements for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 License DPR-002, Grundy County, IL, 28480-28481 [2011-12039]

Download as PDF 28480 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 95 / Tuesday, May 17, 2011 / Notices NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [NRC–2011–0108]; Docket No. 50–010 Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Related to Exemption From Certain Requirements for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1 License DPR–002, Grundy County, IL Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. AGENCY: John Hickman, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop: T8F5, Washington, DC 20555–00001. Telephone: 301–415–3017; e-mail: John.Hickman@nrc.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: I. Introduction The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering a request dated December 3, 2010, by Exelon Nuclear (Exelon, the licensee) requesting exemptions from the security requirements in 10 CFR Part 73 and 10 CFR 50.54(p) for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station (DNPS) Unit 1. This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been developed in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21. Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES II. Environmental Assessment Identification of Proposed Action The proposed action would eliminate the security plan requirements from the 10 CFR Part 50 licensed site because the DNPS Unit 1 spent nuclear fuel has been transferred to either the Dresden Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) site or to the DNPS Unit 3 spent fuel pool, both located within the protected area of Units 2 and 3. There is no longer any special nuclear material (SNM) located within DNPS Unit 1 other than that contained in plant systems as residual contamination. Part of this proposed action meets the categorical exclusion provision in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), as part of this action is an exemption from the requirements of the Commission’s regulations and (i) there is no significant hazards consideration; (ii) there is no significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite; (iii) there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:21 May 16, 2011 Jkt 223001 radiation exposure; (iv) there is no significant construction impact; (v) there is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents; and (vi) the requirements from which an exemption is sought involve safeguard plans. Therefore, this part of the action does not require either an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement. This environmental assessment was prepared for the part of the proposed action not involving safeguards plans. Need for Proposed Action Sections 50.54 and 73.55 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations require that licensees establish and maintain physical protection and security for activities involving SNM within the 10 CFR Part 50 licensed area of a facility. The proposed action is needed because there is no longer any nuclear fuel in the 10 CFR Part 50 licensed facility that requires protection against radiological sabotage or diversion. The proposed action will allow the licensee to conserve resources for decommissioning activities. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that exempting the facility from physical protection security requirements will not have any adverse environmental impacts. There will be minor savings of energy and vehicular use associated with the security force no longer performing patrols, checks, and normal security functions. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action The alternative is the no-action alternative, under which the staff would deny the exemption request. This denial of the request would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative are similar, therefore the no-action alternative is not further considered. Conclusion The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action will not significantly impact the quality of the human environment, and that the proposed action is the preferred alternative. Agencies and Persons Consulted In accordance with its stated policy, on April 6, 2011, the staff consulted with the Illinois State official, Joseph G. Klinger of the Division of Nuclear Safety, Illinois Emergency Management Agency, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments. The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is of a procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. III. Finding of No Significant Impact The NRC staff has prepared this EA as part of its review of the proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. IV. Further Information For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the licensee’s letter dated December 3, 2010, [ADAMS Accession Number ML103400572]. Documents related to this action, including the application and supporting documentation, are available online in the NRC Library 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. E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 95 / Tuesday, May 17, 2011 / Notices 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. These documents may also be viewed electronically on the public computers located at the NRC’s 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, this 6th day of May, 2011. For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Keith I. McConnell, Deputy Director, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management Programs. [FR Doc. 2011–12039 Filed 5–16–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7590–01–P NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION [Docket Nos. 50–325 and 50–324; NRC– 2011–0107] Carolina Power & Light Company; Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering issuance of an exemption, pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 26.9, ‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from paragraphs (c) and (d) of 10 CFR 26.205, ‘‘Work hours,’’ for Facility Operating License Nos. DPR 71 and DPR–62, issued to Carolina Power & Light Company (the licensee), for operation of the Brunswick Steam Electric Plant (BSEP), Units 1 and 2, located in Brunswick County, North Carolina. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, ‘‘Criteria for and identification of licensing and regulatory actions requiring environmental assessments,’’ the NRC performed an environmental assessment and concluded that the proposed action will have no significant environmental impact. Environmental Assessment Identification of the Proposed Action The proposed action would consider approval of an exemption for BSEP, Units 1 and 2 from certain requirements of 10 CFR part 26, ‘‘Fitness for duty programs.’’ Specifically, the licensee VerDate Mar<15>2010 16:21 May 16, 2011 Jkt 223001 requested approval of an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c), ‘‘Work hours scheduling,’’ and (d), ‘‘Work hour controls,’’ during declaration of severe weather conditions involving tropical storm or hurricane force winds. The licensee in its request stated that during these conditions, adherence to all work hour control requirements could impede the ability to respond to a plant emergency and ensure that the plant reaches and maintains a safe and secure status. The licensee specifically stated that the exemption would only apply to severe weather conditions where tropical storm or hurricane force winds are predicted onsite; requiring the sequestering of the BSEP personnel. The proposed exemption will allow the licensee to not meet the requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c) and (d), during the period of time defined by the entry condition until the exit condition. The licensee needs the proposed exemption to support effective response to severe weather conditions when travel to and from the BSEP site may not be safe or even possible. During these times, the licensee sequesters sufficient individuals, including covered workers, to staff two 12-hour shifts to maintain the safe and secure operation of the facility. The exemption would only apply to individuals designated as the storm crew who perform duties specified in 10 CFR 26.4(a)(1) through (a)(5), namely, (1) Operating or onsite directing of the operation of structures, systems and components (SSCs) that a risk-informed evaluation process has shown to be significant to public health and safety; (2) performing health physics or chemistry duties required as a member of the onsite emergency response organization minimum shift complement; (3) performing the duties of a fire brigade member who is responsible for understanding the effects of fire and fire suppressants on safe shutdown capability; (4) performing maintenance or onsite directing of the maintenance of SSCs that a riskinformed evaluation process has shown to be significant to public health and safety; and (5) performing security duties as an armed security force officer, alarm station operator, response team leader, or watchperson. When storm crew sequestering exit conditions are met, full compliance with 10 CFR 26.205(c) and (d) will be required. Since 10 CFR 26.207(d), ‘‘Plant emergencies,’’ already provides an exception for the time period associated with a declared emergency, the exemption requested per 10 CFR 26.9 only applies to the applicable time PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 28481 periods prior to and following the 10 CFR 26.207(d) exception, requiring the sequestering storm crew at BSEP, Units 1 and 2. The proposed action does not involve any physical changes to the reactor, fuel, plant, structures, support structures, water, or land at the BSEP, Units 1 and 2, site. The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee’s application dated December 16, 2010, as supplemented by letters dated January 27, March 7, and April 13, 2011. The Need for the Proposed Action The proposed action is needed because the licensee is unable to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 26.205(c) and (d) during declarations of severe weather conditions that could result due to prevailing tropical storm or hurricane force winds impacting the facility. Compliance with work hour control requirements could impede the licensee’s ability to use whatever staff resources may be necessary to respond to a plant emergency and ensure that the plant reaches and maintains a safe and secure status. Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and concludes that there are no environmental impacts associated with the proposed exemption. The details of the staff’s safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption, if approved by the NRC, that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the exemption to the regulation. The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability or consequences of accidents. No changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite. There is no significant increase in the amount of any effluent released offsite. There is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed action does not have any foreseeable impacts to land, air, or water resources, including impacts to biota. In addition, there are also no known socioeconomic or environmental justice impacts associated with such proposed action. Therefore, there are no significant nonradiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes that there are no significant environmental E:\FR\FM\17MYN1.SGM 17MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 95 (Tuesday, May 17, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28480-28481]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-12039]



[[Page 28480]]

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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[NRC-2011-0108]; Docket No. 50-010


Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 
Related to Exemption From Certain Requirements for the Dresden Nuclear 
Power Station, Unit No. 1 License DPR-002, Grundy County, IL

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Hickman, Division of Waste 
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State 
Materials and Environmental Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop: T8F5, Washington, DC 20555-00001. 
Telephone: 301-415-3017; e-mail: John.Hickman@nrc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is considering a 
request dated December 3, 2010, by Exelon Nuclear (Exelon, the 
licensee) requesting exemptions from the security requirements in 10 
CFR Part 73 and 10 CFR 50.54(p) for the Dresden Nuclear Power Station 
(DNPS) Unit 1.
    This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been developed in accordance 
with the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21.

II. Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would eliminate the security plan requirements 
from the 10 CFR Part 50 licensed site because the DNPS Unit 1 spent 
nuclear fuel has been transferred to either the Dresden Independent 
Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) site or to the DNPS Unit 3 
spent fuel pool, both located within the protected area of Units 2 and 
3. There is no longer any special nuclear material (SNM) located within 
DNPS Unit 1 other than that contained in plant systems as residual 
contamination.
    Part of this proposed action meets the categorical exclusion 
provision in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(25), as part of this action is an 
exemption from the requirements of the Commission's regulations and (i) 
there is no significant hazards consideration; (ii) there is no 
significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts 
of any effluents that may be released offsite; (iii) there is no 
significant increase in individual or cumulative public or occupational 
radiation exposure; (iv) there is no significant construction impact; 
(v) there is no significant increase in the potential for or 
consequences from radiological accidents; and (vi) the requirements 
from which an exemption is sought involve safeguard plans. Therefore, 
this part of the action does not require either an environmental 
assessment or an environmental impact statement. This environmental 
assessment was prepared for the part of the proposed action not 
involving safeguards plans.

Need for Proposed Action

    Sections 50.54 and 73.55 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations require that licensees establish and maintain physical 
protection and security for activities involving SNM within the 10 CFR 
Part 50 licensed area of a facility. The proposed action is needed 
because there is no longer any nuclear fuel in the 10 CFR Part 50 
licensed facility that requires protection against radiological 
sabotage or diversion. The proposed action will allow the licensee to 
conserve resources for decommissioning activities.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its evaluation of the proposed action and 
concludes that exempting the facility from physical protection security 
requirements will not have any adverse environmental impacts. There 
will be minor savings of energy and vehicular use associated with the 
security force no longer performing patrols, checks, and normal 
security functions.
    The proposed action will not significantly increase the probability 
or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of 
any effluents that may be released off site, and there is no 
significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposure. 
Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmental impacts 
associated with the proposed action.
    With regard to potential non-radiological impacts, the proposed 
action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect non-
radiological plant effluents and has no other environmental impact. 
Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological environmental 
impacts associated with the proposed action.
    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

    The alternative is the no-action alternative, under which the staff 
would deny the exemption request. This denial of the request would 
result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental 
impacts of the proposed action and the no-action alternative are 
similar, therefore the no-action alternative is not further considered.

Conclusion

    The NRC staff has concluded that the proposed action will not 
significantly impact the quality of the human environment, and that the 
proposed action is the preferred alternative.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on April 6, 2011, the staff 
consulted with the Illinois State official, Joseph G. Klinger of the 
Division of Nuclear Safety, Illinois Emergency Management Agency, 
regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State 
official had no comments.
    The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action is of a 
procedural nature, and will not affect listed species or critical 
habitat. Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 
of the Endangered Species Act. The NRC staff has also determined that 
the proposed action is not the type of activity that has the potential 
to cause effects on historic properties. Therefore, no further 
consultation is required under Section 106 of the National Historic 
Preservation Act.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC staff has prepared this EA as part of its review of the 
proposed action. On the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are 
no significant environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that 
preparation of an environmental impact statement is not warranted. 
Accordingly, the NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant 
Impact is appropriate.

IV. Further Information

    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated December 3, 2010, [ADAMS Accession Number 
ML103400572]. Documents related to this action, including the 
application and supporting documentation, are available online in the 
NRC Library 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.

[[Page 28481]]

    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. These documents may also be viewed 
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's 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, this 6th day of May, 2011.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Keith I. McConnell,
Deputy Director, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing 
Directorate, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, 
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management 
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2011-12039 Filed 5-16-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P