[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 1 (Monday, January 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 187-189]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-33073]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION


Programmatic Environmental Assessment and Final Finding of No 
Significant Impact for Exemptions From the Implementation Deadline for 
New Security Requirements

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received and 
expects to receive exemption requests from several nuclear power 
reactor licensees. Each expected exemption request will be from the 
implementation date requirement of Title 10 of the Code of Federal 
Regulations (10 CFR) 73.55. The NRC is authorized to issue exemptions 
pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC has 
performed a programmatic environmental assessment of these exemption 
requests. The NRC concluded that the proposed action constitutes 
administrative (timing) changes that would not impact the environmental 
resources near any specified nuclear power plant. Based upon the 
results of this programmatic environmental assessment, the NRC is 
issuing a finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action may include issuing exemptions to nuclear power 
plant licensees for up to 40 nuclear power plant sites, all of which 
have already been granted plant-specific exemptions granting additional 
time to implement some of the new requirements of 10 CFR 73.55. These 
sites are:

Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, and 3
Brunswick Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2
Columbia Generating Station
Cooper Nuclear Station
Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant
Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 1
Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
Fermi 2
Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1
H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit No. 2
Hope Creek Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1, 2 and 3
James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant
Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
Millstone Power Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, and 3
Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant
North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
Palisades Nuclear Plant
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, and 3
Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station
Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2
Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3
Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1
Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2
Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1
South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2
Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2
Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1
Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2
Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3
Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2

[[Page 188]]

Wolf Creek Generating Station

    Specifically, the licensees for each of these plants may propose an 
additional alternate date for full compliance beyond the March 31, 2010 
date required by 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), and if approved by the NRC, would 
be granted a plant-specific exemption. The proposed action, an 
exemption extending the schedule for completion of actions required by 
the revised 10 CFR 73.55, would not involve any physical changes to the 
reactor(s), fuel, plant structures, support structures, land, or water 
at each nuclear power plant site. If granted, a plant-specific safety 
evaluation will be included in the letter to the licensee approving the 
exemption from the regulation.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to continue to exempt up to 40 
nuclear power plant sites from being in full compliance with new 
requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.55. The original implementation 
date was March 31, 2010 and previous exemptions were granted to several 
licensees from meeting that date. Another round of exemptions is needed 
to provide these licensees with additional time to comply with the rule 
requirements. While licensees completed much of the work required by 
the 10 CFR 73.55 rule change at their plants by the March 31, 2010 
implementation date, affected licensees require additional time to 
complete all newly required modifications.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC regulation, 10 CFR 73.55, requires NRC nuclear power plant 
licensees to implement various physical protection requirements to 
prevent radiological sabotage. The NRC has completed its environmental 
assessment of the proposed action, and has concluded that, should NRC 
decide to grant a 10 CFR 73.55 compliance date exemption to these 
plants, extending the implementation deadline would not significantly 
affect plant safety and would not significantly affect the probability 
of an accident.
    The proposed action would not increase the radiological hazard 
beyond what was analyzed in the environmental assessment and finding of 
no significant impact made by the Commission in promulgating its 
revisions to 10 CFR 73.55 as discussed in the Federal Register notice 
dated March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). There would be no change to 
radioactive effluents and emissions that would increase radiation 
exposures to plant workers and members of the public. Therefore, no 
radiological impacts are expected as a result of the proposed action.
    In addition, there will be no construction or major renovation of 
any buildings or structures, nor any ground disturbing activities 
associated with an extension of the compliance deadline. Licensees 
would not increase or decrease their workforce, nor is traffic to or 
around any of the subject power plants expected to increase, as a 
result of an extension of the compliance deadline. Therefore, providing 
licensees with additional time to comply with the revised requirements 
of 10 CFR 73.55 would not alter land use, air quality, and water use 
(quality and quantity) conditions or National Pollutant Discharge 
Elimination System permits at each of the nuclear power plants that may 
be the subject of an exemption request. Aquatic and terrestrial habitat 
in the vicinity of each power plant; threatened, endangered, and 
protected species under the Endangered Species Act; and essential fish 
habitat covered by the Magnuson-Stevens Act would not be affected. In 
addition, historic and cultural resources, socioeconomic conditions, 
and minority and low-income populations in the vicinity of each power 
plant would also not be affected by this action.
    As previously noted, in promulgating its amendments to 10 CFR part 
73, the Commission prepared an environmental assessment of the rule 
change and published a finding of no significant impact (10 CFR parts 
50, 52, 72, and 73, Power Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR 13926 
(March 27, 2009)). Thus, through the proposed action, the Commission 
would be granting additional time for the licensees to comply with 
regulatory requirements for which the Commission has already found no 
significant impact.
    For the foregoing reasons, the NRC concludes that there would be no 
significant radiological or non-radiological environmental impacts 
associated with the extension of the implementation date of the new 
requirements of 10 CFR 73.55.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed action, the NRC considered denial 
of the proposed actions (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). Denial 
of the exemption requests would result in no change in current 
environmental conditions at each of the nuclear power plants.
    Denial of the exemption requests would result in the licensees 
being in non-compliance with 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1) and thus, subject to 
NRC enforcement action. The end result, however, would still be 
ultimate licensee compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, but 
with the added expense to both the NRC and the licensees of any 
enforcement actions. The NRC concludes that the environmental impacts 
of the proposed exemption and the ``no action'' alternative are 
similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The proposed action does not involve the use of any different 
resources than those considered in the final environmental statements 
for the granting of the operating licenses for these nuclear power 
plants and for those plants that have had their licenses renewed, in 
NUREG-1437, ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License 
Renewal of Nuclear Plants,'' published in May 1996, and its supplements 
published from 1999 to the present.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the above environmental assessment, which in 
accordance with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), is incorporated into this finding 
of no significant impact by reference, the NRC concludes that the 
proposed action constitutes an administrative change (timing) that 
would 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 details with respect to the proposed action will be 
available as individual licensees request exemptions. Portions of these 
requests may contain proprietary and safeguards information and, 
accordingly, will not available to the public. Other parts of these 
documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public 
Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint North, Public File Area 
O-1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 
Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the 
Agencywide Document Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.
    Persons who do not have access to ADAMS or who encounter problems 
in accessing the documents located in ADAMS should contact the NRC PDR 
Reference staff by telephone at 1-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, or send 
an e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9aeafee8b4e8ffe9f5efe8f9ffdaf4e8f9b4fdf5ec"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5a2a3e2874283f29352f28393f1a342839743d352c">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of December 2010.


[[Page 189]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Robert J. Pascarelli,
Chief, Plant Licensing Branch III-1, Division of Operating Reactor 
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-33073 Filed 12-30-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>