Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, 26501-26503 [2018-12249]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2018 / Notices
treated as objections to the grant of the
contemplated partially exclusive patent
license. Objections submitted in
response to this notice will not be made
available to the public for inspection
and, to the extent permitted by law, will
not be released under the Freedom of
Information Act.
ADDRESSES: Objections relating to the
prospective license may be submitted to
Patent Counsel, Office of Chief Counsel,
NASA Langley Research Center, MS 30,
Hampton, Virginia 23681. Phone (757)
864–3221. Facsimile (757) 864–9190.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jonathan B. Soike, Patent Attorney,
Office of Chief Counsel, NASA Langley
Research Center, MS 30, Hampton,
Virginia 23681. Phone (757) 864–7863.
Facsimile (757) 864–9190.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This
notice of intent to grant a partially
exclusive patent license is issued in
accordance with 35 U.S.C. 209(e) and 37
CFR 404.7(a)(1)(i). The patent rights in
these inventions have been assigned to
the United States of America as
represented by the Administrator of the
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration. The prospective
partially exclusive patent license will
comply with the requirements of 35
U.S.C. 209 and 37 CFR 404.7.
Information about other NASA
inventions available for licensing can be
found online at https://
technology.nasa.gov.
Mark Dvorscak,
Agency Counsel for Intellectual Property.
[FR Doc. 2018–12231 Filed 6–6–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510–13–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72–26; NRC–2018–0108]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Diablo Canyon Independent Spent Fuel
Storage Installation
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and
finding of no significant impact;
issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is considering
issuing an environmental assessment
(EA) and a finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) for its review and
approval of the decommissioning
funding plans (DFPs) submitted by
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
(PGEC) on December 17, 2012, and
December 17, 2015, for the independent
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 06, 2018
Jkt 244001
spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) at
Diablo Canyon in Avila Beach,
California.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in
this document are available on June 7,
2018.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2018–0108 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may obtain publicly-available
information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2018–0108. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer
Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127;
email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced in this document
(if it is available in ADAMS) is provided
the first time that it is mentioned in this
document. In addition, for the
convenience of the reader, the ADAMS
accession numbers are provided in a
table in the ‘‘Availability of Documents’’
section of this document.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pamela Longmire, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–7465, email:
Pamela.Longmire@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering the approval
of the DFPs for the Diablo Canyon ISFSI.
PGEC submitted an initial DFP and an
updated DFP for NRC review and
approval by letters dated December 17,
2012 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML12353A315), and December 17, 2015
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
26501
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15351A502),
respectively. The NRC staff has
prepared a final EA (ADAMS Accession
No. ML18131A047) in support of its
review of PGEC’s DFPs in accordance
with the NRC regulations in part 51 of
title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘Environmental
Protection Regulations for Domestic
Licensing and Related Regulatory
Functions,’’ which implements the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.). Based on the EA, the NRC staff has
determined that approval of the DFPs
for the Diablo Canyon ISFSI will not
significantly affect the quality of the
human environment, and accordingly,
the staff has concluded that a FONSI is
appropriate. The NRC staff further finds
that preparation of an environmental
impact statement is not warranted.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The Diablo Canyon ISFSI is located in
Avila Beach, California. PGEC is
authorized by the NRC, under License
No. SNM–2511, to store spent nuclear
fuel at the Diablo Canyon ISFSI.
The NRC requires its licensees to plan
for the eventual decommissioning of
their licensed facilities prior to license
termination. On June 17, 2011, the NRC
published a final rule in the Federal
Register amending its decommissioning
planning regulations (76 FR 35512). The
final rule amended the NRC regulation,
10 CFR 72.30, which concerns financial
assurance and decommissioning for
ISFSIs. This regulation now requires
each holder of, or applicant for, a
license under 10 CFR part 72 to submit,
for NRC review and approval, a DFP.
The purpose of the DFP is to
demonstrate the licensee’s financial
assurance (i.e., that funds will be
available to decommission the ISFSI).
The NRC staff is reviewing the DFPs
submitted by PGEC on December 13,
2012, and December 17, 2015.
Specifically, the NRC must determine
whether PGEC’s DFPs contain the
information required by §§ 72.30(b) and
(c), and whether PGEC has provided
reasonable assurance that funds will be
available to decommission the ISFSI.
Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is the NRC’s
review and approval of PGEC’s DFPs
submitted in accordance with
§§ 72.30(b) and (c). To approve the
DFPs, the NRC will evaluate whether
the decommissioning cost estimate
adequately estimates the cost to conduct
the required ISFSI decommissioning
activities prior to license termination,
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
26502
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2018 / Notices
including identification of the volume
of onsite subsurface material containing
residual radioactivity that will require
remediation to meet the license
termination criteria in §§ 20.1402 or
20.1403. The NRC will also evaluate
whether the aggregate dollar amount of
PGEC financial instruments provides
adequate financial assurance to cover
the decommissioning cost estimate and
that the financial instruments meet the
criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(e). Finally, the
NRC will evaluate whether the effects of
the following events have been
considered in PGEC’s submittal: (1)
Spills of radioactive material producing
additional residual radioactivity in
onsite subsurface material; (2) facility
modifications; (3) changes in authorized
possession limits; and (4) actual
remediation costs that exceed the
previous cost estimate, consistent with
10 CFR 72.30(c).
The proposed action does not require
any changes to the ISFSI’s licensed
routine operations, maintenance
activities, or monitoring programs, nor
does it require any new construction or
land-disturbing activities. The scope of
the proposed action concerns only the
NRC’s review and approval of PGEC’s
DFPs. The scope of the proposed action
does not include, and will not result in,
the review and approval of any
decontamination or decommissioning
activity or license termination for the
ISFSI or any other part of Diablo
Canyon.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action provides a
means for PGEC to demonstrate that it
will have sufficient funding to cover the
costs of decommissioning the ISFSI,
including the reduction of the residual
radioactivity at the ISFSI to the level
specified by the applicable NRC license
termination regulations concerning
release of the property (10 CFR 20.1402
or 10 CFR 20.1403).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Action
The NRC’s approval of the DFPs will
not change the scope or nature of the
operation of the ISFSI and will not
authorize any changes to licensed
operations or maintenance activities.
The NRC’s approval of the DFPs will not
result in any changes in the types,
characteristics, or quantities of
radiological or non-radiological
effluents released into the environment
from the ISFSI, or result in the creation
of any solid waste. Moreover, the
approval of the DFPs will not authorize
any construction activity or facility
modification. Therefore, the NRC staff
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 06, 2018
Jkt 244001
concludes that the approval of PGEC’s
DFPs is a procedural and administrative
action that will not result in any
significant impact to the environment.
Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act of 1966, as amended
(NHPA), requires Federal agencies to
consider the effects of their
undertakings on historic properties. In
accordance with the NHPA
implementing regulations at 36 CFR part
800, ‘‘Protection of Historic Properties,’’
the NRC’s approval of PGEC’s DFPs
constitutes a Federal undertaking. The
NRC, however, has determined that the
approval of the DFPs is a type of
undertaking that does not have the
potential to cause effects on historic
properties, assuming such historic
properties were present, because the
NRC’s approval of PGEC’s DFPs will not
authorize or result in changes to
licensed operations or maintenance
activities, or changes in the types,
characteristics, or quantities of
radiological or non-radiological
effluents released into the environment
from the ISFSI, or result in the creation
of any solid waste. Therefore, in
accordance with 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), no
consultation is required under Section
106 of the NHPA.
Under Section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, prior to taking a
proposed action, a Federal agency must
determine whether (i) endangered and
threatened species or their critical
habitats are known to be in the vicinity
of the proposed action and, if so,
whether (ii) the proposed Federal action
may affect listed species or critical
habitats. The NRC has determined that
the proposed action will have no effect
on any listed species or their critical
habitats because the NRC’s approval of
PGEC’s DFPs will not authorize or result
in changes to licensed operations or
maintenance activities, or changes in
the types, characteristics, or quantities
of radiological or non-radiological
effluents released into the environment
from the ISFSI, or result in the creation
of any solid waste.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
In addition to the proposed action, the
NRC evaluated the no-action alternative.
The no-action alternative is to deny
PGEC’s DFPs. A denial of a DFP that
meets the criteria of §§ 72.30(b) or (c)
does not support the regulatory intent of
the 2011 rulemaking. As noted in the
EA for the 2011 rulemaking (ADAMS
Accession No. ML090500648), not
promulgating the 2011 final rule would
have increased the likelihood of
additional legacy sites. Thus, denying
PGEC’s DFPs, which the NRC has found
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
to meet the criteria of §§ 72.30(b) and
(c), will undermine the licensee’s
decommissioning planning. On this
basis, the NRC has concluded that the
no-action alternative is not a viable
alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC staff consulted with other
agencies and parties regarding the
environmental impacts of the proposed
action. The NRC provided a draft of its
EA to the California Energy Commission
(CEC or State) by letter dated April 25,
2016 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML17107A273), and gave the CEC 30
days to respond. The State did not
respond. The NRC also consulted with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by
letter dated April 25, 2016 (ADAMS
Accession No. ML16120A606).
However, the NRC staff has determined
that consultation under Section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 is not
required because the proposed action is
administrative/procedural in nature and
will not affect listed species or critical
habitat (ADAMS Accession No.
ML17135A062).
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has determined that the
proposed action, the review and
approval of PGEC’s DFPs submitted in
accordance with §§ 72.30(b) and (c), will
not authorize or result in changes to
licensed operations or maintenance
activities, or changes in the types,
characteristics, or quantities of
radiological or non-radiological
effluents released into the environment
from the ISFSI, or result in the creation
of any solid waste. Moreover, the
approval of the DFPs will not authorize
any construction activity, facility
modification, or any other landdisturbing activity. The NRC staff has
concluded that the proposed action is a
procedural and administrative action
and, as such, that the proposed action
will not have a significant effect on the
quality of the human environment.
Therefore, the NRC staff has determined
not to prepare an environmental impact
statement for the proposed action but
will issue this FONSI. In accordance
with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), the FONSI
incorporates the EA by reference.
IV. Availability of Documents
The following documents, related to
this Notice, can be found using any of
the methods provided in the following
table. Instructions for accessing ADAMS
were provided under the ADDRESSES
section of this notice.
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
26503
Federal Register / Vol. 83, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2018 / Notices
Date
Document
December 17, 2012 ........
December 17, 2015 ........
February 1, 2009 ............
May 15, 2017 ..................
April 25, 2016 .................
April 25, 2016 .................
Submission of PGEC DFP .....................................................................................................
Submission of PGEC Triennial DFP ......................................................................................
Environmental Assessment for Final Rule—Decommissioning Planning .............................
Note to File Re: Section 7 Consultations for ISFSI DFPs .....................................................
Consultation Letter (ML16120A553–RLSO) ..........................................................................
Letter to M. Fris, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Re: NRC Preliminary Determination of No
Effects Regarding the Diablo Canyon ISFSI DFP.
Final EA for the Approval of the DFP ....................................................................................
May 11, 2018 ..................
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day
of June, 2018.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John McKirgan,
Branch Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch,
Division of Spent Fuel Management, Office
of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2018–12249 Filed 6–6–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
Advisory Committee on the Medical
Uses of Isotopes: Meeting Notice
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) will convene a
teleconference meeting of the Advisory
Committee on the Medical Uses of
Isotopes (ACMUI) on July 16, 2018, to
discuss the draft report of the ACMUI
Subcommittee on Training and
Experience Requirements for All
Modalities. This report will include the
subcommittee’s comments on the NRC
staff’s evaluation of the training and
experience requirements for different
categories of radiopharmaceuticals in
Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, part 35, ‘‘Medical Use of
Byproduct Material,’’ Subpart E,
‘‘Unsealed Byproduct Material—Written
Directive Required.’’ Meeting
information, including a copy of the
agenda and handouts, will be available
at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/acmui/meetings/2018.html.
The agenda and handouts may also be
obtained by contacting Ms. Maryann
Ayoade using the information below.
DATES: The teleconference meeting will
be held on Monday, July 16, 2018, 2:00
p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time.
Public Participation: Any member of
the public who wishes to participate in
the teleconference should contact Ms.
Ayoade using the contact information
below or may register for the
GoToWebinar at https://
attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/
2201638285137455618.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:19 Jun 06, 2018
Jkt 244001
ADAMS Accession No.
Contact Information: Maryann
Ayoade, email: Maryann.Ayoade@
nrc.gov, telephone: (301) 415–0862.
Conduct of the Meeting
Dr. Christopher Palestro, ACMUI
Chairman, will preside over the
meeting. Dr. Palestro will conduct the
meeting in a manner that will facilitate
the orderly conduct of business. The
following procedures apply to public
participation in the meeting:
1. Persons who wish to provide a
written statement should submit an
electronic copy to Ms. Ayoade at the
contact information listed above. All
submittals must be received by July 11,
2018, three business days prior to the
meeting, and must pertain to the topic
on the agenda for the meeting.
2. Questions and comments from
members of the public will be permitted
during the meetings, at the discretion of
the Chairman.
3. The draft transcript and meeting
summary will be available on the
ACMUI’s website https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/doc-collections/acmui/
meetings/2018.html on or about August
27, 2018.
This meeting will be held in
accordance with the Atomic Energy Act
of 1954, as amended (primarily Section
161a); the Federal Advisory Committee
Act (5 U.S.C. App); and the
Commission’s regulations in Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, part 7,
‘‘Advisory Committees.’’
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day
of June, 2018.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Russell E. Chazell,
Federal Advisory Committee Management
Officer.
[FR Doc. 2018–12269 Filed 6–6–18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ML12353A315
ML15351A502
ML090500648
ML17135A062
ML17107A273
ML16120A606
ML18131A047
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2018–0109]
Draft Letter to the Nuclear Energy
Institute Regarding the Clarification of
Regulatory Paths for Lead Test
Assemblies
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of availability;
opportunity for comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is soliciting public
comments on a draft letter to the
Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) clarifying
the regulatory paths for the use of lead
test assemblies (LTAs). This draft letter
would finalize the NRC staff’s views on
the preliminary positions regarding
LTAs provided in a letter to NEI dated
June 29, 2017. The NRC does not
currently have consolidated regulatory
guidance regarding the use of LTAs.
Therefore, the NRC has drafted this
letter to clarify its positions regarding
the use of LTAs. These positions would
affect light-water reactor licensees who
wish to irradiate LTAs.
DATES: Submit comments by June 27,
2018. Comments received after this date
will be considered if it is practical to do
so, but the Commission is able to ensure
consideration only for comments
received before this date.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking website: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2018–0109. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer
Borges; telephone: 301–287–9127;
email: Jennifer.Borges@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individuals listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• Mail comments to: May Ma, Office
of Administration, Mail Stop: TWFN–7–
A60M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
For additional direction on obtaining
information and submitting comments,
see ‘‘Obtaining Information and
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26501-26503]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12249]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72-26; NRC-2018-0108]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company Diablo Canyon Independent Spent
Fuel Storage Installation
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact;
issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering
issuing an environmental assessment (EA) and a finding of no
significant impact (FONSI) for its review and approval of the
decommissioning funding plans (DFPs) submitted by Pacific Gas and
Electric Company (PGEC) on December 17, 2012, and December 17, 2015,
for the independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) at Diablo
Canyon in Avila Beach, California.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on
June 7, 2018.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0108 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2018-0108. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Jennifer Borges; telephone: 301-287-
9127; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document
(if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is
mentioned in this document. In addition, for the convenience of the
reader, the ADAMS accession numbers are provided in a table in the
``Availability of Documents'' section of this document.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pamela Longmire, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-7465, email:
[email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
The NRC is considering the approval of the DFPs for the Diablo
Canyon ISFSI. PGEC submitted an initial DFP and an updated DFP for NRC
review and approval by letters dated December 17, 2012 (ADAMS Accession
No. ML12353A315), and December 17, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML15351A502), respectively. The NRC staff has prepared a final EA
(ADAMS Accession No. ML18131A047) in support of its review of PGEC's
DFPs in accordance with the NRC regulations in part 51 of title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ``Environmental Protection
Regulations for Domestic Licensing and Related Regulatory Functions,''
which implements the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Based on the EA, the NRC staff has
determined that approval of the DFPs for the Diablo Canyon ISFSI will
not significantly affect the quality of the human environment, and
accordingly, the staff has concluded that a FONSI is appropriate. The
NRC staff further finds that preparation of an environmental impact
statement is not warranted.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The Diablo Canyon ISFSI is located in Avila Beach, California. PGEC
is authorized by the NRC, under License No. SNM-2511, to store spent
nuclear fuel at the Diablo Canyon ISFSI.
The NRC requires its licensees to plan for the eventual
decommissioning of their licensed facilities prior to license
termination. On June 17, 2011, the NRC published a final rule in the
Federal Register amending its decommissioning planning regulations (76
FR 35512). The final rule amended the NRC regulation, 10 CFR 72.30,
which concerns financial assurance and decommissioning for ISFSIs. This
regulation now requires each holder of, or applicant for, a license
under 10 CFR part 72 to submit, for NRC review and approval, a DFP. The
purpose of the DFP is to demonstrate the licensee's financial assurance
(i.e., that funds will be available to decommission the ISFSI). The NRC
staff is reviewing the DFPs submitted by PGEC on December 13, 2012, and
December 17, 2015. Specifically, the NRC must determine whether PGEC's
DFPs contain the information required by Sec. Sec. 72.30(b) and (c),
and whether PGEC has provided reasonable assurance that funds will be
available to decommission the ISFSI.
Description of the Proposed Action
The proposed action is the NRC's review and approval of PGEC's DFPs
submitted in accordance with Sec. Sec. 72.30(b) and (c). To approve
the DFPs, the NRC will evaluate whether the decommissioning cost
estimate adequately estimates the cost to conduct the required ISFSI
decommissioning activities prior to license termination,
[[Page 26502]]
including identification of the volume of onsite subsurface material
containing residual radioactivity that will require remediation to meet
the license termination criteria in Sec. Sec. 20.1402 or 20.1403. The
NRC will also evaluate whether the aggregate dollar amount of PGEC
financial instruments provides adequate financial assurance to cover
the decommissioning cost estimate and that the financial instruments
meet the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(e). Finally, the NRC will evaluate
whether the effects of the following events have been considered in
PGEC's submittal: (1) Spills of radioactive material producing
additional residual radioactivity in onsite subsurface material; (2)
facility modifications; (3) changes in authorized possession limits;
and (4) actual remediation costs that exceed the previous cost
estimate, consistent with 10 CFR 72.30(c).
The proposed action does not require any changes to the ISFSI's
licensed routine operations, maintenance activities, or monitoring
programs, nor does it require any new construction or land-disturbing
activities. The scope of the proposed action concerns only the NRC's
review and approval of PGEC's DFPs. The scope of the proposed action
does not include, and will not result in, the review and approval of
any decontamination or decommissioning activity or license termination
for the ISFSI or any other part of Diablo Canyon.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action provides a means for PGEC to demonstrate that
it will have sufficient funding to cover the costs of decommissioning
the ISFSI, including the reduction of the residual radioactivity at the
ISFSI to the level specified by the applicable NRC license termination
regulations concerning release of the property (10 CFR 20.1402 or 10
CFR 20.1403).
Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action
The NRC's approval of the DFPs will not change the scope or nature
of the operation of the ISFSI and will not authorize any changes to
licensed operations or maintenance activities. The NRC's approval of
the DFPs will not result in any changes in the types, characteristics,
or quantities of radiological or non-radiological effluents released
into the environment from the ISFSI, or result in the creation of any
solid waste. Moreover, the approval of the DFPs will not authorize any
construction activity or facility modification. Therefore, the NRC
staff concludes that the approval of PGEC's DFPs is a procedural and
administrative action that will not result in any significant impact to
the environment.
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as
amended (NHPA), requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of
their undertakings on historic properties. In accordance with the NHPA
implementing regulations at 36 CFR part 800, ``Protection of Historic
Properties,'' the NRC's approval of PGEC's DFPs constitutes a Federal
undertaking. The NRC, however, has determined that the approval of the
DFPs is a type of undertaking that does not have the potential to cause
effects on historic properties, assuming such historic properties were
present, because the NRC's approval of PGEC's DFPs will not authorize
or result in changes to licensed operations or maintenance activities,
or changes in the types, characteristics, or quantities of radiological
or non-radiological effluents released into the environment from the
ISFSI, or result in the creation of any solid waste. Therefore, in
accordance with 36 CFR 800.3(a)(1), no consultation is required under
Section 106 of the NHPA.
Under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, prior to
taking a proposed action, a Federal agency must determine whether (i)
endangered and threatened species or their critical habitats are known
to be in the vicinity of the proposed action and, if so, whether (ii)
the proposed Federal action may affect listed species or critical
habitats. The NRC has determined that the proposed action will have no
effect on any listed species or their critical habitats because the
NRC's approval of PGEC's DFPs will not authorize or result in changes
to licensed operations or maintenance activities, or changes in the
types, characteristics, or quantities of radiological or non-
radiological effluents released into the environment from the ISFSI, or
result in the creation of any solid waste.
Alternative to the Proposed Action
In addition to the proposed action, the NRC evaluated the no-action
alternative. The no-action alternative is to deny PGEC's DFPs. A denial
of a DFP that meets the criteria of Sec. Sec. 72.30(b) or (c) does not
support the regulatory intent of the 2011 rulemaking. As noted in the
EA for the 2011 rulemaking (ADAMS Accession No. ML090500648), not
promulgating the 2011 final rule would have increased the likelihood of
additional legacy sites. Thus, denying PGEC's DFPs, which the NRC has
found to meet the criteria of Sec. Sec. 72.30(b) and (c), will
undermine the licensee's decommissioning planning. On this basis, the
NRC has concluded that the no-action alternative is not a viable
alternative.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC staff consulted with other agencies and parties regarding
the environmental impacts of the proposed action. The NRC provided a
draft of its EA to the California Energy Commission (CEC or State) by
letter dated April 25, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17107A273), and gave
the CEC 30 days to respond. The State did not respond. The NRC also
consulted with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by letter dated April
25, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16120A606). However, the NRC staff has
determined that consultation under Section 7 of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973 is not required because the proposed action is
administrative/procedural in nature and will not affect listed species
or critical habitat (ADAMS Accession No. ML17135A062).
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
The NRC staff has determined that the proposed action, the review
and approval of PGEC's DFPs submitted in accordance with Sec. Sec.
72.30(b) and (c), will not authorize or result in changes to licensed
operations or maintenance activities, or changes in the types,
characteristics, or quantities of radiological or non-radiological
effluents released into the environment from the ISFSI, or result in
the creation of any solid waste. Moreover, the approval of the DFPs
will not authorize any construction activity, facility modification, or
any other land-disturbing activity. The NRC staff has concluded that
the proposed action is a procedural and administrative action and, as
such, that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on
the quality of the human environment. Therefore, the NRC staff has
determined not to prepare an environmental impact statement for the
proposed action but will issue this FONSI. In accordance with 10 CFR
51.32(a)(4), the FONSI incorporates the EA by reference.
IV. Availability of Documents
The following documents, related to this Notice, can be found using
any of the methods provided in the following table. Instructions for
accessing ADAMS were provided under the ADDRESSES section of this
notice.
[[Page 26503]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Document ADAMS Accession No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 17, 2012....................... Submission of PGEC DFP....... ML12353A315
December 17, 2015....................... Submission of PGEC Triennial ML15351A502
DFP.
February 1, 2009........................ Environmental Assessment for ML090500648
Final Rule--Decommissioning
Planning.
May 15, 2017............................ Note to File Re: Section 7 ML17135A062
Consultations for ISFSI DFPs.
April 25, 2016.......................... Consultation Letter ML17107A273
(ML16120A553-RLSO).
April 25, 2016.......................... Letter to M. Fris, U.S. Fish ML16120A606
and Wildlife Service Re: NRC
Preliminary Determination of
No Effects Regarding the
Diablo Canyon ISFSI DFP.
May 11, 2018............................ Final EA for the Approval of ML18131A047
the DFP.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of June, 2018.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John McKirgan,
Branch Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, Division of Spent Fuel
Management, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2018-12249 Filed 6-6-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
