8152 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–275 and 50–323; NRC– 

2010–0059] 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company; 

Diablo Canyon Power Plant 

Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5, 

‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from the 

implementation date for certain new 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 73, 

‘‘Physical protection of plants and 

materials,’’ for Facility Operating 

License Nos. DPR–80 and DPR–82, 

issued to Pacific Gas and Electric 

Company (PG&E, the licensee), for 

operation of the Diablo Canyon Power 

Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (DCPP), located 

in San Luis Obispo County, California. 

In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the 

NRC prepared an environmental 

assessment documenting its finding. 

The NRC concluded that the proposed 

actions will have no significant 

environmental impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would exempt 

PG&E from the required implementation 

date of March 31, 2010, for several new 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 73. 

Specifically, PG&E would be granted an 

exemption from being in full 

compliance with certain new 

requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.55 

by the March 31, 2010, deadline. PG&E 

has proposed an alternate full 

compliance implementation date of June 

30, 2011, approximately 15 months 

beyond the date required by 10 CFR Part 

73. The proposed action, an extension of 

the schedule for completion of certain 

actions required by the revised 10 CFR 

Part 73, does not involve any physical 

changes to the reactor, fuel, plant 

structures, support structures, water, or 

land at the PG&E site. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee’s application dated 

December 4, 2009. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action is needed to 

provide the licensee with additional 

time to perform the required upgrades to 

the PG&E security system to meet the 

new requirements in 10 CFR Part 73. 

Implementation of the new 

requirements will involve physical 

modifications to the existing plant 

security system. 

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 

extend the implementation deadline 

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 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact made by the 

Commission in promulgating its 

revisions to 10 CFR Part 73 as discussed 

in a Federal Register notice dated 

March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). There 

will be no change to radioactive 

effluents that affect radiation exposures 

to plant workers and members of the 

public. 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 impact to 

socioeconomic resources. Therefore, no 

changes to or different types of nonradiological environmental impacts are 

expected as a result of the proposed 

exemption. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. In addition, in promulgating its 

revisions to 10 CFR Part 73, the 

Commission prepared an environmental 

assessment and published a finding of 

no significant impact [Part 73, Power 

Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR 

13926 (March 27, 2009)]. 

With its request to extend the 

implementation deadline, the licensee 

currently maintains a security system 

acceptable to the NRC and that will 

continue to provide acceptable physical 

protection of the DCPP in lieu of the 

new requirements in 10 CFR Part 73. 

Therefore, the extension of the 

implementation date of the new 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 73 to June 

30, 2011, would not have any significant 

environmental impacts. 

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 

actions, the NRC staff considered denial 

of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the 

exemption request would result in no 

change in current environmental 

impacts. If the proposed action was 

denied, the licensee would have to 

comply with the March 31, 2010, 

implementation deadline. The 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

exemption and the ‘‘no-action’’ 

alternative 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 DCPP, dated May 

1973, with Addendum dated May 1976. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on January 20, 2010, the NRC staff 

consulted with the California State 

official, Mr. Stephen Hsu of the 

California Department of Public Health, 

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. 

Portions of the December 4, 2009, 

submittal contain security-related and 

safeguards information and, 

accordingly, is being withheld from the 

public. For further details with respect 

to the proposed action, see the redacted 

version of the December 4, 2009, letter 

submitted by the licensee on January 22, 

2010. The non-proprietary, public 

version of this document 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–1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike 

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible electronically from the 

Agencywide Documents Access and 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 35 / Tuesday, February 23, 2010 / Notices 8153 

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 pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day 

of February 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

James R. Hall, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch IV, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–3499 Filed 2–22–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–298; NRC–2010–0061] 

Nebraska Public Power District; 

Cooper Nuclear Station Environmental 

Assessment and Finding of No 

Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of an exemption, pursuant to 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) Section 73.5, 

‘‘Specific exemptions,’’ from the 

implementation date for certain new 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 73, 

‘‘Physical protection of plants and 

materials,’’ for Facility Operating 

License No. DPR–46, issued to Nebraska 

Public Power District (NPPD, the 

licensee), for operation of the Cooper 

Nuclear Station (CNS), located in 

Nemaha County, Nebraska. Therefore, as 

required by 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC 

performed an environmental 

assessment. Based on the results of the 

environmental assessment, the NRC is 

issuing a finding of no significant 

impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would exempt 

NPPD from the required implementation 

date of March 31, 2010, for several new 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 73. 

Specifically, NPPD would be granted an 

exemption from being in full 

compliance with certain new 

requirements contained in 10 CFR 73.55 

by the March 31, 2010, deadline. NPPD 

has proposed an alternate full 

compliance implementation date of 

August 31, 2010, 5 months beyond the 

date required by 10 CFR Part 73. The 

proposed action, an extension of the 

schedule for completion of certain 

actions required by the revised 10 CFR 

Part 73, does not involve any physical 

changes to the reactor, fuel, plant 

structures, support structures, water, or 

land at the NPPD site. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee’s application dated 

December 22, 2009. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action is needed to 

provide the licensee with additional 

time to perform the required upgrades to 

the NPPD security system due to 

resource and logistical impacts of the 

fall 2009 refueling outage and other 

factors, including inclement weather. 

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 

extend the implementation deadline 

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 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact made by the 

Commission in promulgating its 

revisions to 10 CFR Part 73 as discussed 

in a Federal Register notice dated 

March 27, 2009 (74 FR 13926). There 

will be no change to radioactive 

effluents that affect radiation exposures 

to plant workers and members of the 

public. 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 

impact to socioeconomic resources. 

Therefore, no changes to or different 

types of non-radiological environmental 

impacts are expected as a result of the 

proposed exemption. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action. In addition, in promulgating its 

revisions to 10 CFR Part 73, the 

Commission prepared an environmental 

assessment and published a finding of 

no significant impact [Part 73, Power 

Reactor Security Requirements, 74 FR 

13926 (March 27, 2009)]. 

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 

actions, the NRC staff considered denial 

of the proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘noaction’’ alternative). Denial of the 

exemption request would result in no 

change in current environmental 

impacts. If the proposed action was 

denied, the licensee would have to 

comply with the March 31, 2010, 

implementation deadline. The 

environmental impacts of the proposed 

exemption and the ‘‘no-action’’ 

alternative 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 Cooper Nuclear 

Station dated February 1973. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on January 5, 2010, the NRC staff 

consulted with the Nebraska State 

official, Ms. J. Schmitt of the Office of 

Radiological Health, 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. 

For further details with respect to the 

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter 

dated December 22, 2009. Portions of 

the document contain security-related 

information and, accordingly, are not 

available to the public. Other parts of 

the document 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– 

1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES