11202 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 10, 2010 / Notices 

Congress and oversight agencies, and 

annual cost accounting reports. 

22. Department of Transportation, 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration (N1–416–10–1, 1 item, 1 

temporary item). Master files of an 

electronic information system used to 

allow public access to agency 

publications through its traffic safety 

materials catalog. 

23. Department of the Treasury, 

Departmental Offices (N1–56–09–20, 5 

items, 3 temporary items). Master files, 

inputs, and outputs associated with an 

electronic correspondence management 

system used to track incoming 

documentation related to case files, 

litigation, and other legal matters. 

Records relating to White House and 

congressional correspondence are 

proposed for permanent retention. 

24. Department of the Treasury, 

Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade 

Bureau (N1–564–09–10, 2 items, 2 

temporary items). Inputs and master 

files of an electronic information system 

that contains data on industry tax 

liabilities on regulated products. 

25. Department of the Treasury, 

Internal Revenue Service (N1–58–09– 

59, 4 items, 4 temporary items). Master 

files, outputs, and system 

documentation associated with an 

electronic information system used to 

streamline customer service by 

providing a common user interface. 

26. Department of the Treasury, 

Internal Revenue Service (N1–58–09– 

85, 2 items, 2 temporary items). 

Applications for grants used to fund 

programs which offer tax counseling 

and assistance to low income and 

elderly taxpayers. 

27. Department of the Treasury, 

Internal Revenue Service (N1–58–09– 

87, 2 items, 2 temporary items). Master 

files and system documentation 

associated with an electronic 

information system used to verify the 

employment status of agency staff. 

28. Department of the Treasury, 

Internal Revenue Service (N1–58–09– 

89, 3 items, 3 temporary items). Master 

files and system documentation 

associated with an electronic 

information system used to scan and 

route paper correspondence received 

from taxpayers. 

Dated: March 4, 2010. 

Michael J. Kurtz, 

Assistant Archivist for Records Services— 

Washington, DC. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5197 Filed 3–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7515–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 50–364; NRC–2010–0092] 

Southern Nuclear Operating Company; 

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of 

Amendment to Facility Operating 

License, Proposed No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

and Opportunity for a Hearing 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC, the Commission) is 

considering issuance of an amendment 

to Facility Operating License No. NPF– 

8, issued to Southern Nuclear Operating 

Company, Inc. (SNC, the licensee), for 

operation of the Joseph M. Farley 

Nuclear Plant, Unit 2 (FNP, Unit 2), 

located in Houston County, Alabama. 

The proposed amendment would delay 

implementation of a modification to 

eliminate the reactor coolant pump 

breaker position reactor trip function for 

FNP Unit 2. Elimination of this trip 

function was approved by license 

amendment issued on September 18, 

2009, which approved the licensee 

making the modification prior to the 

end of the 20th refueling outage (U2R20) 

for Unit 2. The licensee requested 

approval to delay implementation of the 

modification until prior to the end of 

Unit 2’s refueling outage 21 (U2R21). 

Before issuance of the proposed 

license amendment, the Commission 

will have made findings required by the 

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended 

(the Act), and the Commission’s 

regulations. 

The Commission has made a 

proposed determination that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. Under 

the Commission’s regulations in Title 10 

of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 

CFR), section 50.92, this means that 

operation of the facility in accordance 

with the proposed amendment would 

not (1) Involve a significant increase in 

the probability or consequences of an 

accident previously evaluated; or (2) 

create the possibility of a new or 

different kind of accident from any 

accident previously evaluated; or (3) 

involve a significant reduction in a 

margin of safety. As required by 10 CFR 

50.91(a), the licensee has provided its 

analysis of the issue of no significant 

hazards consideration, which is 

presented below: 

1. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed Unit 2 amendment 

implementation schedule extension is 

administrative in nature and does not require 

any physical plant modifications, physically 

affect any plant systems or components, or 

entail changes in plant operation. The 

amendment implementation schedule 

extension does not significantly increase the 

probability or consequences of an accident 

previously evaluated in the Final Safety 

Analysis Report (FSAR). All of the safety 

analyses have been evaluated for impact. The 

change in the implementation schedule of 

the reactor coolant pump breaker position 

reactor trip and technical specification 

change will not initiate any accident; 

therefore, the probability of an accident has 

not been increased. An evaluation of dose 

consequences, with respect to the proposed 

changes, indicates there is no impact due to 

the proposed changes and all acceptance 

criteria continue to be met. Operation for an 

additional cycle with the RCP breaker 

position trip enabled will have negligible 

safety consequences given that the 

configuration of plant equipment currently in 

place to minimize the likelihood of an 

unwarranted trip will remain. There is no 

change to the current licensing basis. 

Therefore, this change does not involve a 

significant increase in the probability or 

consequences of an accident previously 

evaluated. 

2. Does the proposed change create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident from any previously evaluated? 

Response: No. 

The proposed Unit 2 amendment 

implementation schedule extension is 

administrative in nature and does not require 

any physical plant modifications, physically 

affect any plant systems or components, or 

entail changes in plant operation. The 

proposed amendment implementation 

schedule extension does not create the 

possibility of a new or different kind of 

accident than any accident already evaluated 

in the FSAR. No new accident scenarios, 

failure mechanisms or limiting single failures 

are introduced as result of the proposed 

change. The proposed amendment 

implementation schedule extension has no 

adverse effects on any safety-related system. 

Operation for an additional cycle with the 

RCP breaker position trip enabled will have 

negligible safety consequences given that the 

configuration of plant equipment currently in 

place to minimize the likelihood of an 

unwarranted trip will remain. There is no 

change to the current licensing basis. 

Therefore, all accident analyses criteria 

continue to be met and this change does not 

create the possibility of a new or different 

kind of accident from any accident 

previously evaluated. 

3. Does the proposed change involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety? 

Response: No. 

The proposed Unit 2 amendment 

implementation schedule extension is 

administrative in nature and does not require 

any physical plant modifications, physically 

affect any plant systems or components, or 

entail changes in plant operation. The 

proposed amendment implementation 

schedule extension does not involve a 

significant reduction in a margin of safety. 

All analyses that credit the Reactor Coolant 

System Low Flow reactor trip function have 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 10, 2010 / Notices 11203 

been reviewed and no changes to any inputs 

are required. The evaluation demonstrated 

that all applicable acceptance criteria are 

met. Operation for an additional cycle with 

the RCP breaker position trip enabled will 

have negligible safety consequences given 

that the configuration of plant equipment 

currently in place to minimize the likelihood 

of an unwarranted trip will remain. There is 

no change to the current licensing basis. 

Therefore, the proposed amendment 

implementation schedule extension does not 

involve a significant reduction in the margin 

of safety. 

The NRC staff has reviewed the 

licensee’s analysis and, based on this 

review, it appears that the three 

standards of 10 CFR 50.92(c) are 

satisfied. Therefore, the NRC staff 

proposes to determine that the 

amendment request involves no 

significant hazards consideration. 

The Commission is seeking public 

comments on this proposed 

determination. Any comments received 

within 30 days after the date of 

publication of this notice will be 

considered in making any final 

determination. 

Normally, the Commission will not 

issue the amendment until the 

expiration of 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice. The 

Commission may issue the license 

amendment before expiration of the 60- 

day period provided that its final 

determination is that the amendment 

involves no significant hazards 

consideration. In addition, the 

Commission may issue the amendment 

prior to the expiration of the 30-day 

comment period should circumstances 

change during the 30-day comment 

period such that failure to act in a 

timely way would result, for example, 

in derating or shutdown of the facility. 

Should the Commission take action 

prior to the expiration of either the 

comment period or the notice period, it 

will publish in the Federal Register a 

notice of issuance. Should the 

Commission make a final No Significant 

Hazards Consideration Determination, 

any hearing will take place after 

issuance. The Commission expects that 

the need to take this action will occur 

very infrequently. 

Written comments may be submitted 

by mail to the Chief, Rulemaking and 

Directives Branch (RDB), TWB–05– 

B01M, Division of Administrative 

Services, Office of Administration, U.S. 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and 

should cite the publication date and 

page number of this Federal Register 

notice. Written comments may also be 

faxed to the RDB at 301–492–3446. 

Documents may be examined, and/or 

copied for a fee, at the NRC’s Public 

Document Room (PDR), located at One 

White Flint North, Room O1 F21, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland. 

Within 60 days after the date of 

publication of this notice, any person(s) 

whose interest may be affected by this 

action may file a request for a hearing 

and a petition to intervene with respect 

to issuance of the amendment to the 

subject facility operating license. 

Requests for a hearing and a petition for 

leave to intervene shall be filed in 

accordance with the Commission’s 

‘‘Rules of Practice for Domestic 

Licensing Proceedings’’ in 10 CFR Part 

2. Interested person(s) should consult a 

current copy of 10 CFR 2.309, which is 

available at the Commission’s PDR, 

located at One White Flint North, Room 

O1F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 

available records will be accessible from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System’s (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http:// 

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections/cfr/. If a request for a hearing 

or petition for leave to intervene is filed 

by the above date, the Commission or a 

presiding officer designated by the 

Commission or by the Chief 

Administrative Judge of the Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board Panel, will 

rule on the request and/or petition; and 

the Secretary or the Chief 

Administrative Judge of the Atomic 

Safety and Licensing Board will issue a 

notice of a hearing or an appropriate 

order. 

As required by 10 CFR 2.309, a 

petition for leave to intervene shall set 

forth with particularity the interest of 

the petitioner in the proceeding, and 

how that interest may be affected by the 

results of the proceeding. The petition 

should specifically explain the reasons 

why intervention should be permitted 

with particular reference to the 

following general requirements: (1) The 

name, address and telephone number of 

the requestor or petitioner; (2) the 

nature of the requestor’s/petitioner’s 

right under the Act to be made a party 

to the proceeding; (3) the nature and 

extent of the requestor’s/petitioner’s 

property, financial, or other interest in 

the proceeding; and (4) the possible 

effect of any decision or order which 

may be entered in the proceeding on the 

requestor’s/petitioner’s interest. The 

petition must also identify the specific 

contentions which the requestor/ 

petitioner seeks to have litigated at the 

proceeding. 

Each contention must consist of a 

specific statement of the issue of law or 

fact to be raised or controverted. In 

addition, the requestor/petitioner shall 

provide a brief explanation of the bases 

for the contention and a concise 

statement of the alleged facts or expert 

opinion which support the contention 

and on which the petitioner intends to 

rely in proving the contention at the 

hearing. The requestor/petitioner must 

also provide references to those specific 

sources and documents of which the 

petitioner is aware and on which the 

petitioner intends to rely to establish 

those facts or expert opinion. The 

petition must include sufficient 

information to show that a genuine 

dispute exists with the applicant on a 

material issue of law or fact. 

Contentions shall be limited to matters 

within the scope of the amendment 

under consideration. The contention 

must be one which, if proven, would 

entitle the petitioner to relief. A 

requestor/petitioner who fails to satisfy 

these requirements with respect to at 

least one contention will not be 

permitted to participate as a party. 

Those permitted to intervene become 

parties to the proceeding, subject to any 

limitations in the order granting leave to 

intervene, and have the opportunity to 

participate fully in the conduct of the 

hearing. 

If a hearing is requested, the 

Commission will make a final 

determination on the issue of no 

significant hazards consideration. The 

final determination will serve to decide 

when the hearing is held. If the final 

determination is that the amendment 

request involves no significant hazards 

consideration, the Commission may 

issue the amendment and make it 

immediately effective, notwithstanding 

the request for a hearing. Any hearing 

held would take place after issuance of 

the amendment. If the final 

determination is that the amendment 

request involves a significant hazards 

consideration, any hearing held would 

take place before the issuance of any 

amendment. 

All documents filed in NRC 

adjudicatory proceedings, including a 

request for hearing, a petition for leave 

to intervene, any motion or other 

document filed in the proceeding prior 

to the submission of a request for 

hearing or petition to intervene, and 

documents filed by interested 

governmental entities participating 

under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in 

accordance with the NRC E–Filing rule 

(72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The E– 

Filing process requires participants to 

submit and serve all adjudicatory 

documents over the Internet, or in some 

cases to mail copies on electronic 

storage media. Participants may not 

submit paper copies of their filings 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
11204 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 10, 2010 / Notices 

unless they seek an exemption in 

accordance with the procedures 

described below. 

To comply with the procedural 

requirements of E–Filing, at least ten 

(10) days prior to the filing deadline, the 

participant should contact the Office of 

the Secretary by e-mail at 

hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone 

at (301) 415–1677, to request (1) a 

digital ID certificate, which allows the 

participant (or its counsel or 

representative) to digitally sign 

documents and access the E–Submittal 

server for any proceeding in which it is 

participating; and (2) advise the 

Secretary that the participant will be 

submitting a request or petition for 

hearing (even in instances in which the 

participant, or its counsel or 

representative, already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Based upon 

this information, the Secretary will 

establish an electronic docket for the 

hearing in this proceeding if the 

Secretary has not already established an 

electronic docket. 

Information about applying for a 

digital ID certificate is available on 

NRC’s public Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/ 

apply-certificates.html. System 

requirements for accessing the E– 

Submittal server are detailed in NRC’s 

‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’ 

which is available on the agency’s 

public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants 

may attempt to use other software not 

listed on the Web site, but should note 

that the NRC’s E–Filing system does not 

support unlisted software, and the NRC 

Meta System Help Desk will not be able 

to offer assistance in using unlisted 

software. 

If a participant is electronically 

submitting a document to the NRC in 

accordance with the E–Filing rule, the 

participant must file the document 

using the NRC’s online, Web-based 

submission form. In order to serve 

documents through EIE, users will be 

required to install a Web browser plugin from the NRC Web site. Further 

information on the Web-based 

submission form, including the 

installation of the Web browser plug-in, 

is available on the NRC’s public Web 

site at http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. 

Once a participant has obtained a 

digital ID certificate and a docket has 

been created, the participant can then 

submit a request for hearing or petition 

for leave to intervene. Submissions 

should be in Portable Document Format 

(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance 

available on the NRC public Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered 

complete at the time the documents are 

submitted through the NRC’s E–Filing 

system. To be timely, an electronic 

filing must be submitted to the E–Filing 

system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern 

Time on the due date. Upon receipt of 

a transmission, the E–Filing system 

time-stamps the document and sends 

the submitter an e-mail notice 

confirming receipt of the document. The 

E–Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the 

document to the NRC Office of the 

General Counsel and any others who 

have advised the Office of the Secretary 

that they wish to participate in the 

proceeding, so that the filer need not 

serve the documents on those 

participants separately. Therefore, 

applicants and other participants (or 

their counsel or representative) must 

apply for and receive a digital ID 

certificate before a hearing request/ 

petition to intervene is filed so that they 

can obtain access to the document via 

the E–Filing system. 

A person filing electronically using 

the agency’s adjudicatory E–Filing 

system may seek assistance by 

contacting the NRC Meta System Help 

Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link 

located on the NRC Web site at http:// 

www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by e-mail at 

MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at (866) 672–7640. The NRC 

Meta System Help Desk is available 

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern 

Time, Monday through Friday, 

excluding government holidays. 

Participants who believe that they 

have a good cause for not submitting 

documents electronically must file an 

exemption request, in accordance with 

10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper 

filing requesting authorization to 

continue to submit documents in paper 

format. Such filings must be submitted 

by: (1) First class mail addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary of the 

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, 

express mail, or expedited delivery 

service to the Office of the Secretary, 

Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland, 20852, Attention: 

Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. 

Participants filing a document in this 

manner are responsible for serving the 

document on all other participants. 

Filing is considered complete by firstclass mail as of the time of deposit in 

the mail, or by courier, express mail, or 

expedited delivery service upon 

depositing the document with the 

provider of the service. A presiding 

officer, having granted an exemption 

request from using E–Filing, may 

require a participant or party to use E– 

Filing if the presiding officer 

subsequently determines that the reason 

for granting the exemption from use of 

E–Filing no longer exists. 

Documents submitted in adjudicatory 

proceedings will appear in NRC’s 

electronic hearing docket which is 

available to the public at http:// 

ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, 

unless excluded pursuant to an order of 

the Commission, or the presiding 

officer. Participants are requested not to 

include personal privacy information, 

such as social security numbers, home 

addresses, or home phone numbers in 

their filings, unless an NRC regulation 

or other law requires submission of such 

information. With respect to 

copyrighted works, except for limited 

excerpts that serve the purpose of the 

adjudicatory filings and would 

constitute a Fair Use application, 

participants are requested not to include 

copyrighted materials in their 

submission. 

Petitions for leave to intervene must 

be filed no later than 60 days from the 

date of publication of this notice. Nontimely filings will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the presiding 

officer that the petition or request 

should be granted or the contentions 

should be admitted, based on a 

balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(c)(1)(i)–(viii). 

For further details with respect to this 

license amendment application, see the 

application for amendment dated 

February 26, 2010, which is available 

for public inspection at the 

Commission’s PDR, located at One 

White Flint North, File Public Area O1 

F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), 

Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available 

records will be accessible electronically 

from the Agencywide Documents 

Access and Management System’s 

(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, 301–415–4737, or 

by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Attorney for licensee: M. Stanford 

Blanton, Esq., Balch and Bingham, Post 

Office Box 306, 1710 Sixth Avenue 

North, Birmingham, Alabama 35201. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 2nd day 

of March 2010. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 10, 2010 / Notices 11205 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Robert E. Martin, 

Senior Project Manager, Plant Licensing 

Branch 2–1, Division of Operating Reactor 

Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor 

Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–5092 Filed 3–9–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[ Docket No. 50–293; NRC–2010–0094] 

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc; 

Pilgrim Nuclear Power 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–35, issued to Entergy 

Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy or the 

licensee), for operation of Pilgrim 

Nuclear Power Station (Pilgrim), located 

in Plymouth County, MA. In accordance 

with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared an 

environmental assessment documenting 

its finding. The NRC concluded that the 

proposed action will have no significant 

impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would exempt 

Pilgrim from the required 

implementation date of March 31, 2010, 

for several new requirements of 10 CFR 

part 73. Specifically, Pilgrim 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. 

Entergy has proposed an alternate full 

compliance implementation date of 

September 15, 2010, approximately 61⁄2

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, water, or 

land at the Pilgrim site. 

The proposed action is in accordance 

with the licensee=s application dated 

January 22, 2010 (Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS) Accession No. 

ML100260716), as supplemented on 

February 2, 2010 (ADAMS Accession 

No. ML100351182). 

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 Pilgrim security system due to 

resource and logistical impacts. The 

request for an exemption from the 

March 31, 2010, implementation date to 

September 15, 2010, is based on the 

delivery dates for the new equipment 

and the time needed to install this new 

equipment to meet the revised 

requirements. 

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 13967). 

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, 13967 (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 

action, the NRC staff considered denial 

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

application 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 action and the ‘‘no action’’ 

alternative action are similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

previously considered in the Final 

Environmental Statement for Pilgrim, 

dated January 1972, and the ‘‘Generic 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

License Renewal of Nuclear Plants: 

Regarding Pilgrim Nuclear Power 

Station,’’ NUREG–1437, Supplement 29, 

published in July 2007 (ADAMS 

Accession No. ML071990027). 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

In accordance with its stated policy, 

on February 5, 2010, the NRC staff 

consulted with the Massachusetts State 

official of the Massachusetts Emergency 

Management Agency 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 January 22, 2010, as 

supplemented by letter dated February 

2, 2010. Portions of the submittal dated 

January 22, 2010, as supplemented by 

letter dated February 2, 2010, contain 

security-related information and, 

accordingly, are not available to the 

public. Publicly-available versions of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES