69138 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Notices 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would allow 

SNC to use GNF–Ziron (GNF—Global 

Nuclear Fuel), an advanced alloy fuel 

cladding material for boiling-water 

reactors which is similar in composition 

to Zircaloy-2, but contains slightly 

higher iron content than specified in 

American Society for Testing and 

Materials B350 (ASTM B350). The 

proposed action is in accordance with 

the licensee’s application dated May 12, 

2010 (Agencywide Documents Access 

and Management System (ADAMS) 

Accession No. ML101340739). 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action is needed so that 

SNC can use GNF–Ziron as an advanced 

alloy for fuel rod cladding and other 

assembly structural components at the 

HNP. 

Section 50.46 of 10 CFR and 10 CFR 

Part 50, Appendix K, make no 

provisions for use of fuel rods clad in a 

material other than zircaloy or 

ZIRLOTM. Since the chemical 

composition of the GNF–Ziron alloy 

differs from the specifications for 

zircaloy or ZIRLOTM, a plant-specific 

exemption is required to allow the use 

of the GNF–Ziron alloy as a cladding 

material or in other assembly structural 

components at the HNP. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC has completed its 

environmental assessment of the 

proposed exemption. The staff has 

concluded that the proposed action to 

use GNF–Ziron fuel rod cladding 

material 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 

Safety Analysis Report. There will be no 

change to radioactive effluents that 

affect radiation exposures to plant 

workers and members of the public. No 

changes will be made to plant buildings 

or the site property. 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 of 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 

noticeable effect on socioeconomic 

conditions in the region. Therefore, no 

changes to or different types of nonradiological environmental impacts are 

expected as a result of the proposed 

action. Accordingly, the NRC concludes 

that there are no significant 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed action. The details of 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. 

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 exemption 

request would result in no change in 

current environmental impacts. The 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action and the alternative action are 

similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

considered in the Final Environmental 

Statement for the Edwin I. Hatch 

Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 2, dated 1978 

and the Generic Environmental Impact 

Statement for License Renewal of 

Nuclear Plants: Regarding Edwin I. 

Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2— 

Final Report (NUREG–1437, 

Supplement 4) dated May 2001 

(ADAMS Accession No. ML011420057) 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on October 25, 2010, the staff consulted 

with the Georgia State official, Mr. Jim 

Hardeman of the Department of Natural 

Resources, 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. 

Further Information 

Documents related to this action, 

including the application for an 

exemption and license amendment and 

supporting documentation, are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room 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. The ADAMS accession 

number for the document related to this 

notice, ‘‘Edwin I. Hatch, Unit 2 Proposed 

Exemption from Fuel Cladding Material 

Requirements in 10 CFR 50.46 and 10 

CFR Appendix K,’’ dated May 12, 2010, 

including non-proprietary publically 

available versions of its enclosures, is 

ML101340739. 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. 

The document may also be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

located at the NRC’s Public Document 

Room (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, November 2, 

2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Robert E. Martin, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch II–1, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–28400 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–133; NRC–2010–0346] 

Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

Related to Exemption of Material for 

Proposed Disposal Procedures for the 

Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit No. 3, 

License DPR–007, Eureka, CA 

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 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Notices 69139 

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 April 1, 2010, as 

supplemented August 12, 2010, by 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

(PG&E, the licensee) for alternate 

disposal of approximately 200,000 cubic 

feet of hazardous waste containing lowactivity radioactive debris, at the US 

Ecology Idaho (USEI) Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

Subtitle C hazardous disposal facility 

located near Grand View, Idaho. This 

request was made under the alternate 

disposal provision contained in 10 CFR 

20.2002 and the exemption provision in 

10 CFR 30.11. 

This Environmental Assessment (EA) 

has been developed in accordance with 

the requirements of 10 CFR 51.21. 

II. Environmental Assessment 

Identification of Proposed Action 

On July 2, 1976, Humboldt Bay Power 

Plant (HBPP) Unit 3 was shut down for 

annual refueling and to conduct seismic 

modifications. In 1983, updated 

economic analyses indicated that 

restarting Unit 3 would probably not be 

cost-effective, and in June 1983, Pacific 

Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) 

announced its intention to 

decommission the unit. On July 16, 

1985, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) issued Amendment 

No. 19 to the HBPP Unit 3 Operating 

License to change the status to possessbut-not-operate. In December of 2008, 

the transfer of spent fuel from the fuel 

storage pool to the dry-cask 

Independent Spent Fuel Storage 

Installation was completed, and the 

decontamination and dismantlement 

phase of HBPP Unit 3 decommissioning 

commenced. In 2010 the construction of 

a new power generation facility on site 

will be completed and the licensee will 

begin dismantlement of the non-nuclear 

HBPP Units 1 and 2. 

PG&E requested NRC authorization 

for the disposal of waste from the HBPP 

at the US Ecology Idaho (USEI) facility 

in accordance with 10 CFR 20.2002. 

This waste would be generated during 

the decommissioning of the non-nuclear 

Units 1 and 2 and the nuclear Unit 3. 

This waste consists of approximately 

200,000 ft3 (5,663 m3) of concrete, steel, 

insulation, roofing material, and other 

debris from Units 1 and 2 as well as 

concrete shielding, building materials, 

and soil debris from Unit 3. 

The waste would be transported by 

truck from HBPP in Eureka, CA to the 

USEI facility, Grand View, Idaho in the 

Owyhee Desert. The USEI facility is a 

Subtitle C Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste 

disposal facility permitted by the State 

of Idaho. The USEI site has both natural 

and engineered features that limit the 

transport of radioactive material. The 

natural features include the low 

precipitation rate [i.e., 18.4 cm/y (7.4 in. 

per year)] and the long vertical distance 

to groundwater (i.e., 61-meter (203-ft) 

thick on average unsaturated zone 

below the disposal zone). The 

engineered features include an 

engineered cover, liners and leachate 

monitoring systems. Because the USEI 

facility is not licensed by the NRC, this 

proposed action would require the NRC 

to exempt the low-contaminated 

material authorized for disposal from 

further AEA and NRC licensing 

requirements. 

Need for Proposed Action 

The subject waste material consists of 

concrete, steel, insulation, roofing 

material, gravel and other metal, wood 

and soil debris generated during 

dismantlement activities located at the 

HBPP site, the majority being from the 

non-nuclear Units 1 and 2. This 

proposed alternate disposal would 

conserve low-level radioactive waste 

disposal capacity. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

evaluation performed by the Licensee to 

demonstrate compliance with the 10 

CFR 20.2002 alternate disposal criteria. 

Under these criteria, a licensee may seek 

NRC authorization to dispose of 

licensed material using procedures not 

otherwise authorized by the NRC’s 

regulations. A licensee’s supporting 

analysis must show that the radiological 

doses arising from the proposed 10 CFR 

20.2002 disposal will be as low as 

reasonably achievable and within the 10 

CFR Part 20 dose limits. 

PG&E performed a radiological 

assessment in consultation with USEI. 

Based on this assessment, PG&E 

concludes that potential doses to 

members of the public, including 

workers involved in the transportation 

and placement of this waste, will be less 

than one millirem total effective dose 

equivalent (TEDE) in one calendar year 

for this project, and well within the ‘‘few 

millirem’’ criteria that the NRC has 

established. 

The staff evaluated activities and 

potential doses associated with 

transportation, waste handling and 

disposal as part of the review of this 10 

CFR 20.2002 application. The projected 

doses to individual transportation and 

USEI workers have been appropriately 

estimated and are demonstrated to meet 

the NRC’s alternate disposal 

requirement of contributing a dose of 

not more than ‘‘a few millirem per year’’ 

to any member of the public. 

Independent review of the post-closure 

and intruder scenarios confirmed that 

the maximum projected dose over a 

period of 1,000 years is also within ‘‘a 

few millirem per year.’’ Additionally, 

the proposed action will not 

significantly increase the probability or 

consequences of accidents and there is 

no significant increase in occupational 

or public radiation exposures. 

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the proposed 

action does not have a potential to affect 

any historic sites. The proposed action 

does not affect non-radiological plant 

effluents, air quality or noise. 

The proposed action and attendant 

exemption of the material from further 

AEA and NRC licensing requirements 

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. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

Due to the very small amounts of 

radioactive material involved, the 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

action are small. Therefore, the only 

alternative the staff considered is the 

no-action alternative, under which the 

staff would deny the disposal 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 therefore similar and the 

no-action alternative is accordingly 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 

NRC provided a draft of this 

Environmental Assessment to the State 

of Idaho Department of Environmental 

Quality for review on October 6, 2010. 

On October 18, 2010, the State replied 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
69140 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 217 / Wednesday, November 10, 2010 / Notices 

by e-mail. The State stated that they did 

not intend to respond. 

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 in 

support 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 

Documents related to this action, 

including the application and 

supporting documentation, are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room 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. The documents related to 

this action are listed below, along with 

their ADAMS accession numbers. 

(1) Letter dated April 1, 2010, 

‘‘Request for 10 CFR 20.2002 Alternate 

Disposal Approval and 10 CFR 30.11 

Exemption of Humboldt Bay Power 

Plant Waste for Disposal at US Ecology 

Idaho.’’ [ADAMS Accession Number 

ML101170554] 

(2) E–Mail dated August 11, 2010, 

providing Radiological Characterization 

Report for Humboldt Bay Power Plant. 

[ML102300557] 

(3) Letter dated August 12, 2010, 

‘‘Revision to Request for 10 CFR 20.2002 

Alternate Disposal Approval and 10 

CFR 30.11 Exemption of Humboldt Bay 

Power Plant Waste for Disposal at US 

Ecology Idaho.’’ [ML102290019] 

(4) E–Mail dated September 18, 2010, 

providing MARSAME process for 

Humboldt Bay Power Plant. 

[ML102700555] 

(5) Letter dated January 21, 2010, 

providing supplemental information on 

USEI [ML100291004] 

(6) Letter dated March 31, 2010, 

providing supplemental information on 

USEI [ML100950386] 

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@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, November 2, 

2010. 

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. 2010–28397 Filed 11–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2010–0344] 

NUREG–1953, Confirmatory ThermalHydraulic Analysis To Support Specific 

Success Criteria in the Standardized 

Plant Analysis Risk Models—Surry and 

Peach Bottom; Draft Report for 

Comment 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of availability and 

request for comments. 

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission has issued for public 

comment a document entitled: NUREG– 

1953, ‘‘Confirmatory Thermal-Hydraulic 

Analysis to Support Specific Success 

Criteria in the Standardized Plant 

Analysis Risk Models—Surry and Peach 

Bottom, Draft Report for Comment.’’ 

DATES: Please submit comments by 

December 15, 2010. Comments received 

after this date will be considered if it is 

practical to do so, but the NRC staff is 

able to ensure consideration only for 

comments received on or before this 

date. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any one of the following methods. 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2010– 

0344 in the subject line of your 

comments. Comments submitted in 

writing or in electronic form will be 

posted on the NRC Web site and on the 

Federal rulemaking Web site 

Regulations.gov. Because your 

comments will not be edited to remove 

any identifying or contact information, 

the NRC cautions you against including 

any information in your submission that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed. 

The NRC requests that any party 

soliciting or aggregating comments 

received from other persons for 

submission to the NRC inform those 

persons that the NRC will not edit their 

comments to remove any identifying or 

contact information, and therefore, they 

should not include any information in 

their comments that they do not want 

publicly disclosed. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for documents filed under Docket ID 

NRC–2010–0344. Address questions 

about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 

301–492–3668; e-mail 

Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. 

Mail comments to: Cindy Bladey, 

Chief, Rules Announcements and 

Directives Branch (RADB), Division of 

Administrative Services, Office of 

Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– 

B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, or by fax to RADB at 301–492– 

3446. 

You can access publicly available 

documents related to this notice using 

the following methods: 

NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): 

The public may examine and have 

copied, for a fee, publicly available 

documents at the NRC’s PDR, Public 

File Area O1 F21, One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland. 

NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access 

and Management System (ADAMS): 

Publicly available documents created or 

received at the NRC are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/

reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, 

the public can gain entry into ADAMS, 

which provides text and image files of 

NRC’s public documents. If you do not 

have access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s 

PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 

301–415–4737, or by e-mail to pdr.

resource@nrc.gov. NUREG–1953 is 

available electronically under ADAMS 

Accession Number ML102940233. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public 

comments and supporting materials 

related to this notice can be found at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

on Docket ID: NRC–2010–0344. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Donald Helton, Division of Risk 

Analysis, Office of Nuclear Regulatory 

Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES