[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 16 (Friday, January 24, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3571-3573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-1637]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-438 and 50-439]


Tennessee Valley Authority; Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 
2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering 
issuance of an extension of the Construction Permit No. CPPR-122 for 
Bellefonte Nuclear Plant (BLN), Unit 1, and CPPR-123 for BLN, Unit 2, 
issued to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) (permittee). The 
facility is located about 6 miles east-northeast of Scottsboro, 
Alabama, on the west shore of the Guntersville Reservoir at Tennessee 
River Mile 392, in Jackson County, Alabama. Therefore, as required by 
10 CFR 51.21, the NRC is issuing this environmental assessment and 
finding of no significant impact.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    The proposed action would extend the construction permit expiration 
date for BLN, Unit 1, from October 1, 2001, to October 1, 2011, and the 
construction permit expiration date for BLN, Unit 2, from October 1, 
2004, to October 1, 2014. The proposed action is in response to TVA's 
request, dated July 11, 2001.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed because construction of BLN, Units 1 
and 2, is not yet completed. TVA requested the extension to allow it to 
maintain the choice of a full range of competitive energy sources. The 
request was made because of the increase in the electrical demand in 
the TVA region.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The environmental impacts associated with the construction of the 
facility have been previously discussed and evaluated in the Final 
Environmental Statement (FES), June 1974, prepared as part of the NRC 
staff's review of the construction permit application. Because of the 
passage of time from the issuance of the FES, the staff requested 
additional information in a June 5, 2002, letter to TVA to determine if 
the conclusions reached in the June 1974 FES remain valid. TVA 
responded to these questions in a letter dated August 26, 2002.
    In its August 26, 2002, response, TVA addressed the impact of 
resumption of construction in the following areas: Archaeological sites 
and historic properties, disturbance of land, socioeconomic impacts, 
additional cumulative impacts from other projects in the area, and 
threatened and endangered species. Highlights of TVA's response follow. 
TVA stated that no additional archaeological sites have been identified 
in areas that might be affected by the resumption of construction 
activities. No future disturbance is currently contemplated on or 
adjacent to known archaeological sites. The NRC staff asked TVA how 
they responded to the recommendation by the Alabama Historical 
Commission on adaptive re-use of the 1845 Tavern and Inn. TVA responded 
that the building has been removed since 1974 when it was determined 
that site was eligible for placement on the National Register of 
Historic Places. The 1845 Tavern and Inn is not on TVA property, and 
the buildings were removed by the owners. Before construction of the 
existing site facilities, the Alabama State Historic Preservation 
Office approved the design and indicated that no mitigation would be 
required.
    Regarding disturbance of land, TVA stated that almost all of the 
construction required for completion of the BLN site as a two-unit 
nuclear plant has been started and very few facilities remain that 
would require new land disturbance. TVA stated that the remaining 
construction that would require new land disturbance are as follows:


    1. If construction resumes, it is planned to eventually move 
(re-route) the first half mile of the south entrance road such that 
it would still join Jackson County Highway 33, but to an 
intersection which is about 1200 feet east of the current connection 
point. The site has completed an environmental assessment for this 
change which would improve traffic visibility and thereby increase 
commuter safety. Some new ground would be disturbed for this road, 
but there are no associated significant environmental impacts.
    2. If construction resumes, some new backfill borrow pits may be 
required to obtain clay. These would likely be made in undisturbed 
ground east of the main site power plant buildings. The topsoil 
would be removed temporarily and replaced to restore the sites after 
clay removal. Tree cover would be removed in this process.
    3. Meteorological monitoring requirements have changed, which 
might necessitate construction of a new environmental data station. 
This new facility could possibly be sited on undisturbed soil.
    4. Construction of the startup and recirculation equipment 
building for Unit 2 has not been initiated; however, the site for 
this building is disturbed ground very close to the south side of 
the Unit 2 auxiliary building. Other potential construction 
activities on disturbed ground include increasing the size of the 
construction and administration building (CAB); additional fire 
protection tanks by the CAB; additional waste tanks adjacent to the 
Unit 1 reactor building; and completion of the auxiliary feedwater 
pipe trench near the Unit 2 reactor building. The power stores 
building may be enlarged, and new plant security requirements may 
necessitate changes to the gatehouse.

    The FES evaluated the terrestrial and aquatic impacts due to 
construction of the BLN, Units 1 and 2. Included in these impacts were 
development of access corridors (roads), and clearing and excavation 
for all construction. The FES requires a construction monitoring 
program to monitor the effect of these activities on the environment. 
If construction is resumed, these activities will be monitored by the 
construction monitoring program and, therefore, the conclusions of the 
FES regarding potential land disturbance remain valid.
    The socioeconomic impacts have changed since the 1974 FES was 
issued. In 1970, the population in the surrounding area was 39,202 and 
in 2000, the population was 59,926. The 1974 FES estimated a peak 
workforce of 2,300 people. The actual workforce peaked at 4,600 people 
prior to construction being suspended in 1988. TVA estimates that the 
workforce required to complete construction will peak at 4,600. The 
staff questioned if these changes to the demographics of the region may 
lead to significant socioeconomic impacts different from those 
previously evaluated in the FES. Examples of these impacts are demands 
on the local schools, hospitals, public facilities, utilities (e.g., 
water use), transportation infrastructure, and construction worker 
shortages. TVA responded that:

    The FES addressed both temporary impacts to community facilities 
and services which would occur during the construction period and 
those which would occur from the permanent workforce. Significant 
impacts were not expected in either case, but the FES concluded that 
facilities and services such as schools would unavoidably be 
stressed by construction and operation of BLN. Consequently, TVA 
committed to monitoring the situation and to working with local and 
state officials to mitigate any unacceptable adverse conditions 
which might result.
    The currently larger projected construction workforce will 
likely result in greater

[[Page 3572]]

socioeconomic impacts that [sic] those projected in the FES. Two 
more recent Environmental Impact Statements analyze potential 
impacts at higher levels than those in the FES. The first of these 
analyzed potential impacts of converting and operating the 
Bellefonte site as a fossil-fueled power plant (Final Environmental 
Impact Statement for the Bellefonte Conversion Project, Tennessee 
Valley Authority, October 1997). The second analyzed the impacts 
associated with the production of tritium at various TVA nuclear 
sites, including the BLN site (Final Environmental Impact Statement 
for the Production of Tritium in a Commercial Light Water Reactor, 
U.S. Department of Energy, DOE/EIS--0288, March 1999). Impacts of a 
peak construction employment level of 4,500, almost the same as now 
projected, were analyzed in the latter report. Based on these 
analyses, we would anticipate that about 1,500 workers would move 
into the area at peak construction (at sometime during the fourth 
year of construction). Of these, about 1,100 are likely to move to 
Jackson County, and the remainder to surrounding counties. This 
number of movers would result directly in a population increase in 
Jackson County of about 3,000 persons or less at peak construction. 
The maximum impact on Jackson County schools is estimated to be 
somewhat less than 1,000 additional students, roughly a ten percent 
increase. This level of impact, however, would be only for a short 
time with lesser impacts leading up to this peak and following it. 
Impacts on other public services, such as hospitals, transportation, 
and utilities are discussed in more detail in the documents 
referenced above. They would be significant at or near peak, but the 
higher levels would have a relatively short duration. Possible 
impacts on construction worker shortages would depend on the 
magnitude of other construction projects in the larger area around 
the BLN site. The labor market area for construction workers is much 
larger than for most other types of work, and construction workers 
typically move around within large areas thereby decreasing the 
likelihood of significant problems for other construction projects. 
All of these impacts would occur gradually, as the construction 
workforce builds up to its peak during the fourth year. If 
construction resumes, TVA will work with state and local officials 
and civic groups mitigate possible adverse socioeconomic impacts 
caused by activities undertaken to complete construction of BLN or 
to operate the plant after its completion.

    Based on TVA's response, and the recent environmental impact 
statements cited above, the NRC staff concludes that, while the impacts 
will be larger if construction resumes, the mitigative actions will be 
commensurate with the larger impacts and, therefore, the conclusions 
reached in the FES remain valid.
    The staff questioned if there were any projects or activities 
occurring or planned for the area that may lead to additional 
cumulative impacts to the surrounding population or to the natural 
environment. TVA responded that, in general, this growth has consisted 
of numerous small-to-medium size changes rather than one or a few very 
large events, except for the starting and stopping of TVA nuclear 
construction. The projected construction employment would be a major 
addition to the economy of Jackson County. However, many of the workers 
would live elsewhere in the labor market area, including some who would 
temporarily relocate. Within the construction labor market area, the 
employment increase at peak construction would be about 46 to 50 
percent of the recent annual increase in employment. During most of the 
construction period, however, the level would be smaller. In contrast 
to construction at or near peak, operating employment levels would be 
small compared to the normal growth of the area. In the 1974 FES, TVA 
committed to work with state and local officials and civic groups 
throughout the construction and operation of the BLN site to mitigate 
the possible socioeconomic impacts. Based on the above commitment 
contained in the FES, the conclusion of the FES remains valid.
    Regarding threatened and endangered species, the NRC staff, in its 
June 5, 2002, letter, asked if any biota has been added to or removed 
from the list of threatened or endangered species for the BLN site 
environs (including transmission line rights-of-way) based on field 
studies or revisions to the threatened and endangered species list 
since the 1974 FES. TVA responded that no species indigenous to the BLN 
site have been added to the federal or state lists of threatened or 
endangered species since the original FES. The Peregrine Falcon has 
been delisted. Two species, the Bald Eagle and Indiana Bat, are 
currently listed as threatened or endangered for Jackson County, 
Alabama, by the Environmental Protection Agency. Osprey, Pandion 
haliaetus, is not federally listed, but is listed as threatened by the 
State of Alabama. Population levels of osprey have been increasing on 
Guntersville Lake, and several nests have been observed in the vicinity 
of Coon and Crow Creeks. This species would use shoreline habitats 
fronting the BLN site for foraging. The current list of federally 
threatened or endangered species for Jackson County, Alabama, contains 
several species which were not identified or discussed in the original 
FES for BLN. However, none of these except the Gray Bat are known to 
occur at or adjacent to the BLN site, including transmission line 
rights-of-way, and none of these were added based on field studies at 
the BLN site. Gray bats forage in the sloughs and main channel of the 
Tennessee River. However, because of the nature of the activities 
undertaken at the plant and the distance of these plant activities from 
the foraging area, Gray Bats would not be adversely impacted by the 
proposed actions.
    The staff also questioned if there were any known potential adverse 
impacts to any listed or candidate species that might result from the 
resumption of construction at BLN. TVA responded that resumption of 
construction activities at BLN would not be expected to cause adverse 
impacts to any Federal or State-listed or candidate species or their 
habitats. This is primarily because almost all ground or river 
disturbance construction activities have long since been completed. 
Therefore, resumption of construction is unlikely to have any 
significant effect on threatened or endangered species at BLN.
    Since almost all of the construction required for completion of BLN 
as a two-unit nuclear plant has already been, at least, started, very 
few facilities remain that would require new land disturbance; 
therefore, most of the construction impacts discussed in the FES have 
already occurred. This action would extend the period of construction 
as described in the FES. It does not invalidate any of the conclusions 
reached in the 1974 FES. The proposed extension will not allow any work 
to be performed that is not already allowed by the existing 
construction permit. The extension will grant TVA more time to complete 
construction in accordance with the previously approved construction 
permit. In addition, it is the policy of the Commission that a licensee 
will notify the NRC at least 120 days before plant construction is 
expected to resume.
    Based on the foregoing, the NRC staff has concluded that the 
proposed action would have no significant environmental impact. Because 
this action would only extend the period of construction activities 
described in the FES, it does not involve any different impacts or a 
significant change to those impacts described and analyzed in the FES. 
Consequently, an environmental impact statement addressing the proposed 
action is not required.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    A possible alternative to the proposed action would be to deny the 
request. This would result in expiration of the construction permit for 
BLN, Units 1 and 2. This option would require submittal of another 
application for

[[Page 3573]]

construction in order to allow the permittee to complete construction 
of the facility with no significant environmental benefit. The 
environmental impacts of the proposed action and alternative action are 
similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of resources not previously 
considered in the FES for BLN, Units 1 and 2.

Agencies and Persons Contacted

    In accordance with its stated policy, the staff consulted with the 
Alabama State Official, Mr. David Walter of the Alabama Office of 
Radiation Control, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed 
action. The State official had no comments.
    For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee's 
request for extension dated July 11, 2001, and its response to the 
staff's request for additional information dated August 26, 2002.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the environmental assessment, the NRC concludes 
that this 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 this action. 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 01-F21, 
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland. Publicly available records 
will be accessible electronically from the Agencywide Documents 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 by 
e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day of January 2003.
    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Allen G. Howe,
Chief, Section 2, Project Directorate II, Division of Licensing Project 
Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 03-1637 Filed 1-23-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P