Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Humboldt Bay Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, 22913-22915 [2019-10419]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
22913
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 97 / Monday, May 20, 2019 / Notices
Date
Document
ADAMS
Accession
No.
April 26, 2019 ......................
NRC staff’s Final EA for the approval of the decommissioning funding plan ...................................
ML19120A195
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day
of May 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John McKirgan,
Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, Division
of Spent Fuel Management, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2019–10420 Filed 5–17–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72–27; NRC–2018–0257]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company;
Humboldt Bay 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 issuing an
environmental assessment (EA) and a
finding of no significant impact (FONSI)
for its review and approval of the
decommissioning funding plans
submitted by Pacific Gas and Electric
Company (PG&E) on December 17, 2012,
and December 17, 2015, for the
independent spent fuel storage
installation (ISFSI) at Humboldt Bay in
Eureka, California.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in
this document are available on May 20,
2019.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2018–0257 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–2018–0257. Address
questions about Docket IDs in
Regulations.gov 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
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:41 May 17, 2019
Jkt 247001
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, 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. For the convenience of the
reader, instructions about obtaining
materials referenced in this document
are provided in the ‘‘Availability of
Documents’’ section.
• 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 decommissioning funding plans
(DFPs) for the Humboldt Bay ISFSI.
PG&E submitted an initial DFP and an
updated DFP for NRC review and
approval by letters dated December 17,
2012 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML12353A316), and December 17, 2015
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15351A510),
respectively. The NRC staff has
prepared a final EA (ADAMS Accession
No. ML19120A216) in support of its
review of PG&E’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 implement 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 Humboldt Bay 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 (EIS) is not warranted.
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The Humboldt Bay ISFSI is located in
Eureka, California. PG&E is authorized
by the NRC, under License No. SNM–
2514 to store spent nuclear fuel at the
Humboldt Bay 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 PG&E on December 17,
2012, and December 17, 2015.
Specifically, the NRC must determine
whether PG&E’s DFPs contain the
information required by 10 CFR 72.30(b)
and 72.30(c) and whether PG&E 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 PG&E’s DFPs
submitted in accordance with 10 CFR
72.30(b) and 72.30(c). To approve the
DFPs, the NRC evaluates whether the
decommissioning cost estimate (DCE)
adequately estimates the cost to conduct
the required ISFSI decommissioning
activities prior to license termination,
including identification of the volume
of onsite subsurface material containing
residual radioactivity that will require
remediation to meet the license
termination criteria in 10 CFR 20.1402
or 10 CFR 20.1403. The NRC also
evaluates whether the aggregate dollar
amount of PG&E financial instruments
provides adequate financial assurance to
cover the DCE and that the financial
instruments meet the criteria of 10 CFR
72.30(e). Finally, the NRC evaluates
whether the effects of the following
events have been considered in PG&E’s
submittal: (1) Spills of radioactive
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
22914
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 97 / Monday, May 20, 2019 / Notices
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 PG&E’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 Humboldt
Bay.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action provides a
means for the NRC to confirm that PG&E
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).
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
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 PG&E’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
(54 U.S.C. 30618) (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
PG&E’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 PG&E’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 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.) (ESA), 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 PG&E’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
PG&E’s DFPs. A denial of a DFP that
meets the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(b) or
72.30(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
PG&E’s DFPs, which the NRC has found
to meet the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(b)
and 72.30(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
(State) by letter dated April 25, 2016
(ADAMS Accession No. ML17083A015),
and gave the State 30 days to respond.
The State did not respond. The NRC
also consulted with the Fish and
Wildlife Service by letter dated April
25, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML16118A221). However, the NRC staff
has determined that consultation under
ESA Section 7 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 PG&E’s initial and updated
DFPs, submitted in accordance with 10
CFR 72.30(b) and 72.30(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 EIS for the proposed
action but will issue this FONSI.
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 document.
Date
Document
ADAMS
Accession No.
December 17, 2012 ............
December 17, 2015 ............
February 1, 2009 ................
May 15, 2017 ......................
Submission of PG&E decommissioning funding plan .......................................................................
Submission of PG&E triennial decommissioning funding plan .........................................................
Environmental Assessment for Final Rule—Decommissioning Planning .........................................
Note to File re Sct 7 Consultations for ISFSI DFPs .........................................................................
ML12353A316
ML15351A510
ML090500648
ML17135A062
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:41 May 17, 2019
Jkt 247001
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 97 / Monday, May 20, 2019 / Notices
Date
Document
ADAMS
Accession No.
April 25, 2016 ......................
April 25, 2016 ......................
Consultation Letter: ML16120A553–RLSO .......................................................................................
Letter to M. Fris re: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Preliminary Determination of No Effects Regarding the Humboldt Bay Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation Decommissioning Funding Plan.
NRC staff’s Final EA for the approval of the decommissioning funding plan ...................................
ML17083A015
ML16118A221
April 26, 2019 ......................
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day
of May 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John McKirgan,
Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, Division
of Spent Fuel Management, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2019–10419 Filed 5–17–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
OFFICE OF PERSONNEL
MANAGEMENT
Federal Employees’ Retirement
System; Normal Cost Percentages
Office of Personnel
Management.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) is providing notice
of revised normal cost percentages for
employees covered by the Federal
Employees’ Retirement System (FERS)
Act of 1986.
DATES: The revised normal cost
percentages are effective at the
beginning of the first pay period
commencing on or after October 1, 2019.
Agency appeals of the normal cost
percentages must be filed no later than
November 19, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Send or deliver agency
appeals of the normal cost percentages
and requests for actuarial assumptions
and data to the Board of Actuaries, care
of Gregory Kissel, Senior Actuary, Office
of Healthcare and Insurance, Office of
Personnel Management, Room 4316,
1900 E Street NW, Washington, DC
20415.
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Karla Yeakle, (202) 606–0299.
The FERS
Act of 1986, Public Law 99–335, created
a new retirement system intended to
cover most Federal employees hired
after 1983. Most Federal employees
hired before 1984 are under the older
Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS).
Section 8423 of title 5, United States
Code, as added by the FERS Act of 1986,
provides for the payment of the
Government’s share of the cost of the
retirement system under FERS.
Employees’ contributions are
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
22915
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:41 May 17, 2019
Jkt 247001
established by law and constitute only
a portion of the cost of funding the
retirement system; employing agencies
are required to pay the remaining costs.
The amount of funding required, known
as ‘‘normal cost,’’ is the entry age
normal cost of the provisions of FERS
that relate to the Civil Service
Retirement and Disability Fund (Fund).
The normal cost must be computed by
OPM in accordance with generally
accepted actuarial practices and
standards (using dynamic assumptions).
The normal cost calculations depend on
economic and demographic
assumptions. Subpart D of part 841 of
title 5, Code of Federal Regulations,
regulates how normal costs are
determined.
In its meeting on June 1, 2017, the
Board of Actuaries of the Civil Service
Retirement System (the Board)
recommended revisions to the long term
economic assumptions and
recommended changes to the
demographic assumptions used in the
actuarial valuations of CSRS and FERS.
The economic assumptions have
decreased from the previous long term
economic assumptions. The
demographic assumptions include
assumed rates of mortality, employee
withdrawal, retirement, and merit and
longevity pay increases. The revised
demographic assumptions are generally
based on the recent ten-year or twentyyear experience under the retirement
systems, modified to reflect expected
future experience where applicable.
OPM has adopted the Board’s
recommendations.
On October 25, 2017, OPM published
revised regulations related to the
calculation of the FERS normal cost
percentages. These regulations clarified
the employee categories OPM uses to
compute the FERS normal cost
percentages and added a category of
normal cost percentage for employees of
the U.S. Postal Service. Because these
revised regulations had not been
published when the Board met on June
1, 2017, the recommended demographic
assumptions reflect expected
government-wide experience rather than
separate postal-specific and non-postal
specific experience. For non-postal
employees, the normal cost percentage
will reflect the economic assumptions
PO 00000
Frm 00110
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
ML19120A216
and government-wide demographic
assumptions determined by the Board at
its June 1, 2017, meeting. The normal
cost percentages for employees of the
Postal Service will also reflect the
economic assumptions determined by
the Board at its June 1, 2017, meeting
but will use demographic assumptions
that are based on assumptions specific
to the expected experience of postal
employees.
With regard to the economic
assumptions described under section
841.402 of title 5, Code of Federal
Regulations, used in the actuarial
valuations of FERS, the Board
concluded that it would be appropriate
to assume a rate of investment return of
4.50 percent, a reduction of 0.75 percent
from the existing rate of 5.25 percent. In
addition, the Board determined that the
assumed inflation rate should be
reduced 0.50 percent from 3.00 percent
to 2.50 percent, that the assumed rate of
FERS annuitant Cost of Living
Adjustments should remain at 80
percent of the assumed rate of inflation,
and that the projected rate of General
Schedule salary increases should be
reduced 0.50 percent from 3.25 percent
to 2.75 percent. These salary increases
are in addition to assumed within-grade
increases. These assumptions are
intended to reflect the long term
expected future experience of the
Systems.
The demographic assumptions are
determined separately for each of a
number of special groups, in cases
where separate experience data is
available. Based on the demographic
and economic assumptions described
above, OPM has determined the normal
cost percentage for each category of
employees under section 841.403 of title
5, Code of Federal Regulations.
Section 5001 of Public Law 112–96,
The Middle Class Tax Relief and Jobs
Creation Act of 2012, established
provisions for FERS Revised Annuity
Employees (FERS–RAE). The law
permanently increases the retirement
contributions by 2.30 percent of pay for
these employees. Subsequently, Section
401 of Public Law 113–67, the
Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, created
another class of FERS coverage, FERSFurther Revised Annuity Employee
(FERS–FRAE). Employees subject to
E:\FR\FM\20MYN1.SGM
20MYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 97 (Monday, May 20, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22913-22915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10419]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 72-27; NRC-2018-0257]
Pacific Gas and Electric Company; Humboldt Bay 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 issuing an
environmental assessment (EA) and a finding of no significant impact
(FONSI) for its review and approval of the decommissioning funding
plans submitted by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) on December
17, 2012, and December 17, 2015, for the independent spent fuel storage
installation (ISFSI) at Humboldt Bay in Eureka, California.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this document are available on
May 20, 2019.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0257 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-2018-0257. Address
questions about Docket IDs in Regulations.gov 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 ``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]. For the convenience of the reader,
instructions about obtaining materials referenced in this document are
provided in the ``Availability of Documents'' section.
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 decommissioning funding
plans (DFPs) for the Humboldt Bay ISFSI. PG&E submitted an initial DFP
and an updated DFP for NRC review and approval by letters dated
December 17, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12353A316), and December 17,
2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15351A510), respectively. The NRC staff has
prepared a final EA (ADAMS Accession No. ML19120A216) in support of its
review of PG&E'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 implement 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 Humboldt Bay 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 (EIS) is not warranted.
II. Environmental Assessment
Background
The Humboldt Bay ISFSI is located in Eureka, California. PG&E is
authorized by the NRC, under License No. SNM-2514 to store spent
nuclear fuel at the Humboldt Bay 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 PG&E on
December 17, 2012, and December 17, 2015. Specifically, the NRC must
determine whether PG&E's DFPs contain the information required by 10
CFR 72.30(b) and 72.30(c) and whether PG&E 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 PG&E's DFPs
submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 72.30(b) and 72.30(c). To approve
the DFPs, the NRC evaluates whether the decommissioning cost estimate
(DCE) adequately estimates the cost to conduct the required ISFSI
decommissioning activities prior to license termination, including
identification of the volume of onsite subsurface material containing
residual radioactivity that will require remediation to meet the
license termination criteria in 10 CFR 20.1402 or 10 CFR 20.1403. The
NRC also evaluates whether the aggregate dollar amount of PG&E
financial instruments provides adequate financial assurance to cover
the DCE and that the financial instruments meet the criteria of 10 CFR
72.30(e). Finally, the NRC evaluates whether the effects of the
following events have been considered in PG&E's submittal: (1) Spills
of radioactive
[[Page 22914]]
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 PG&E'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 Humboldt Bay.
Need for the Proposed Action
The proposed action provides a means for the NRC to confirm that
PG&E 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 PG&E'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 (54 U.S.C. 30618) (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 PG&E'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 PG&E'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 (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.) (ESA), 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 PG&E'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 PG&E's DFPs. A denial
of a DFP that meets the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(b) or 72.30(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 PG&E's DFPs, which the NRC has
found to meet the criteria of 10 CFR 72.30(b) and 72.30(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 (State) by letter
dated April 25, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17083A015), and gave the
State 30 days to respond. The State did not respond. The NRC also
consulted with the Fish and Wildlife Service by letter dated April 25,
2016 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16118A221). However, the NRC staff has
determined that consultation under ESA Section 7 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 PG&E's initial and updated DFPs, submitted in
accordance with 10 CFR 72.30(b) and 72.30(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 EIS for the
proposed action but will issue this FONSI.
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
document.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Document ADAMS Accession No.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
December 17, 2012...................... Submission of PG&E decommissioning funding ML12353A316
plan.
December 17, 2015...................... Submission of PG&E triennial decommissioning ML15351A510
funding plan.
February 1, 2009....................... Environmental Assessment for Final Rule-- ML090500648
Decommissioning Planning.
May 15, 2017........................... Note to File re Sct 7 Consultations for ISFSI ML17135A062
DFPs.
[[Page 22915]]
April 25, 2016......................... Consultation Letter: ML16120A553-RLSO......... ML17083A015
April 25, 2016......................... Letter to M. Fris re: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory ML16118A221
Commission Preliminary Determination of No
Effects Regarding the Humboldt Bay
Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
Decommissioning Funding Plan.
April 26, 2019......................... NRC staff's Final EA for the approval of the ML19120A216
decommissioning funding plan.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day of May 2019.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
John McKirgan,
Chief, Spent Fuel Licensing Branch, Division of Spent Fuel Management,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2019-10419 Filed 5-17-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
