[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 40 (Tuesday, March 3, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9308-9315]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4441]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-438 and 50-439; NRC-2009-0093]


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

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has prepared this 
Environmental Assessment (EA) associated with a request by the 
Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) to reinstate the construction permits 
(CPs) CPPR-122 and CPPR-123 for the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant (BLN), 
Units 1 and 2, respectively. Based on information provided in TVA's 
letters, dated August 26, September 25, and November 24, 2008, and the 
NRC staff's independent review of references, the NRC staff did not 
identify any significant impact associated with the reinstatement of 
the BLN Units 1 and 2 CPs and the return of the facility to a 
terminated plant status. The NRC staff is documenting its environmental 
review in this EA.

Environmental Assessment

Plant Site and Environs

    BLN Units 1 and 2 are pressurized-water reactor sites that have 
been partially completed. The units are located on a peninsula between 
Town Creek and the Tennessee River at River Mile 392 on the west shore 
of Guntersville Reservoir near Hollywood, Alabama. Most of the 1600 
acres of the site have been previously impacted by the near completion 
of both BLN Units 1 and 2.

Identification of the Proposed Action

    TVA requests reinstatement of the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2. The 
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC now, the NRC) issued the Final 
Environmental Statement (FES) in June 1974 for BLN Units 1 and 2. On 
December 12, 1974, CPs were issued by the NRC. Much of the construction 
work for BLN Units 1 and 2 was subsequently completed. On April 6, 
2006, TVA submitted a request to withdraw the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 
2. On September 14, 2006, the NRC staff withdrew the CPs for BLN Units 
1 and 2 based on the request. Subsequently, TVA submitted a request on 
August 26, 2008, as supplemented by letters dated September 25, 2008, 
and November 24, 2008, to reinstate the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2.

The Need for the Proposed Action

    Reinstatement of the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2 and the return to a

[[Page 9309]]

terminated plant status may subsequently enable TVA to complete 
construction of BLN Units 1 and 2.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    This EA summarizes the radiological and nonradiological impacts to 
the environment that may result from the proposed reinstatement of the 
CPs.

Non-Radiological Impacts

Land Use and Aesthetic Impacts

    Land use and aesthetic impacts from the proposed reinstatement of 
the CPs include impacts from completing the construction of BLN Units 1 
and 2. TVA states in its letter of August 26, 2008, that BLN Units 1 
and 2 are 90 percent and 58 percent complete in construction, 
respectively, with most of the infrastructure work completed.
    Remaining construction-related activities at BLN Units 1 and 2 
include: The potential realignment of the southern entrance road 1200 
feet east of its existing location; the construction of the Unit 2 
startup and recirculation equipment building on previously disturbed 
land near the Unit 2 auxiliary building; the installation of a new 
power stores building; and some changes to the gatehouse and protected 
area fencing. Additionally, clay borrow pits would be dug in wooded 
areas immediately east of the main buildings.
    In response to an NRC staff's request for additional information 
(RAI), TVA noted in its November 24, 2008, letter that few facilities 
would cause further land disturbance, and that previously disturbed 
land, existing parking lots, access road, offices, workshops, and 
warehouses at BLN would be used during the completion of construction. 
Onsite land use conditions at BLN, including conditions along existing 
transmission lines corridors (no new lines would be required to 
complete the two units), switch yards, and substations, would not 
change. The applicant concluded that any impacts to natural resources 
from projected site construction activities would remain bounded by the 
original 1974 FES assessment.
    Based on the information provided by TVA, the NRC staff concludes 
that there would be no significant impact on land use and aesthetic 
resources in the vicinity of BLN Units 1 and 2. The majority of 
construction activities have already occurred and the impacts have been 
assessed and documented in the original 1974 FES.

Historic and Archaeological Resources

    The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requires Federal 
agencies to consider the effects of their undertakings on historic 
properties. Historic properties are defined as resources that are 
eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places 
(NRHP). The criteria for eligibility are listed in the Code of Federal 
Regulations (CFR), under Title 36, ``Parks, Forests, and Public 
Property,'' Part 60, Section 4, ``Criteria for Evaluation'' (36 CFR 
60.4). The historic preservation review process (Section 106 of the 
NHPA) is outlined in regulations issued by the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation in Title 36, ``Parks, Forests, and Public 
Property,'' Part 800, ``Protection of Historic Properties'' (36 CFR 
Part 800). Reinstatement of the BLN CPs and completion of construction 
at the BLN sites is a Federal action that could possibly affect either 
known or undiscovered historic properties located on or near the plant 
site and its associated transmission lines. In accordance with the 
provisions of the NHPA, the NRC makes a reasonable effort to identify 
historic properties in the area of potential effect. The area of 
potential effect for this action is the plant site and the immediate 
environs.
    To assess the environmental impacts to historic and archaeological 
resources, the NRC staff reviewed information provided by TVA in its 
1974 FES, along with supplemental information provided by letters to 
the NRC dated August 26, 2002, and November 24, 2008. Additional site 
details were also obtained from reviewing the Environmental Report in 
TVA's October 30, 2007, application for a Combined License (COL ER) for 
Bellefonte Units 3 and 4.
    In 1936, archaeological salvage excavations were conducted at the 
Bellefonte site associated with the construction of Guntersville 
Reservoir. In 1972, TVA funded an archaeological reconnaissance 
investigation at the Bellefonte site to locate any historic and 
archaeological sites that would be adversely impacted by the 
construction of BLN Units 1 and 2. The 1972 survey identified three new 
prehistoric sites (1JA300-302), and located two sites (1JA978 and 
1JA112) that were previously recorded during the pre-inundation survey 
of Guntersville Lake according to the FES 1974. Site 1JA978 was noted 
in the riverbank and contained both Archaic and Woodland artifacts. 
Site 1JA112 was primarily inundated; therefore, cultural affiliation 
could not be determined for this site. A 2006 survey conducted by TVA 
determined that sites 1JA978 and 1JA112 are located outside of BLN's 
property boundary. Analysis of artifacts recovered at 1JA300 reveal 
that the site was occupied during the Archaic, Woodland, and 
Mississippian cultural periods. Since 1JA300 was going to be adversely 
impacted by the construction of the plant intake structure and access 
road, data recovery excavations were conducted on site 1JA300 in 1973 
and 1974 by the University of Alabama. Information provided by TVA in 
its COL ER indicated that a total of 22 features and 9 burials were 
excavated from the site. One of these features consisted of a small 
structure footprint, which is indicative of village-level habitation. 
The human remains are located at the University of Alabama. By letter 
dated November 24, 2008, TVA stated that additional archaeological 
surveys have been conducted. In 2006, TVA conducted a survey to 
document and evaluate all archaeological resources at BLN. During this 
survey, it was determined that site 1JA300 was destroyed during 
construction of the intake structure, and therefore, is no longer 
eligible for the NRHP.
    Site 1JA301 was recorded during the 1972 reconnaissance survey as 
surficial remains (lithic debris) dating to the Archaic period. 
Analysis of the lithic debris from this site suggests that it was an 
intermittent campsite. It was recommended that any further excavation 
of this site would be unproductive. The 1972 report notes that site 
1JA301 was heavily disturbed and reduced to plow zone scatter of 
prehistoric materials. Additional testing conducted determined that 
site 1JA301 was destroyed during construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 and 
is not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP according to the COL ER.
    Site 1JA302 was purported to be remotely located to the 
construction area according to the FES 1974. Artifacts recovered from 
1JA302 dated the site to the Woodland period. Limited excavation was 
proposed, however, further excavations were not conducted. Site 1JA302 
lies outside the BLN property boundary. Site 1JA302 was determined to 
be eligible for inclusion on the NRHP.
    Site 1JA111 is an undefined prehistoric occupation site. Additional 
testing was conducted at the site during the 2006 survey. A total of 93 
artifacts were recovered, however, no diagnostic lithic artifacts were 
recovered to date from the site according to the COL ER. However, a 
small number of ceramics dating to the Mississippian period were 
recovered. Based upon the stratigraphic profiles and patterns of 
artifact recovery, TVA indicated that site 1JA111 appears to contain 
buried, intact archaeological deposits and has the potential to

[[Page 9310]]

contribute significant scientific and archaeological information 
regarding the prehistory of the Guntersville Basin according to the TVA 
report dated October 2007. Site 1JA111 remains potentially eligible for 
inclusion in the NRHP. TVA has indicated that the site will be fenced 
off, and marked on BLN site drawings as an area to be avoided by any 
future ground disturbing activities according to the TVA letters dated 
August 26, September 25, and November 24, 2008.
    Site 1JA113 is another undefined prehistoric occupation site. 
Additional testing was conducted at the site in 2006 and yielded a 
single prehistoric lithic flake, however, site 1JA113 does not meet the 
criteria of eligibility for the NRHP according to the TVA letters dated 
August 26, September 25, and November 24, 2008.
    One historic site was identified during the 2006 survey. Site 
1JA1103 consists of a collapsed structure and associated outbuilding 
according to the COL ER. The 2006 survey revealed that this site was 
used as a temporary storage and weather shelter during the construction 
of BLN Units 1 and 2 according to the TVA letters dated August 26, 
September 25, and November 24, 2008. Site 1JA1103 has had its 
archaeological integrity altered by the construction of BLN Units 1 and 
2; therefore, the site is not eligible for inclusion in the NRHP. 
Regardless of the site's eligibility, TVA has indicated that the site 
will be avoided.
    Adjacent to the BLN site was the Town of Bellefonte the former 
Jackson County seat. The Town of Bellefonte is listed in the Alabama 
Statewide Plan of Historic Preservation and was determined eligible for 
inclusion on the NRHP. Among the former town buildings was a tavern 
that dated to 1845 according to the 1974 FES. This building and other 
structures associated with the Bellefonte town site were moved in 1974. 
The town site is not on TVA property, and the buildings were removed by 
the owners according to the TVA letter dated August 26, 2002.
    The BLN site was heavily disturbed by the construction of BLN Units 
1 and 2, which began in the 1970s. Reinstatement of the CPs and 
completing construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 would involve some ground 
disturbing activities in previously undisturbed areas of the site. The 
NRC staff anticipates that for areas not previously surveyed, an 
archaeological investigation would be conducted by a qualified 
archaeologist prior to any ground disturbing activities by TVA. 
Additionally, since TVA is a Federal agency, an NHPA Section 106 review 
and consultation with the Alabama Historical Commission would be 
initiated for such activities.
    Based on the information provided in the 1974 FES, and TVA's 
subsequent responses to the NRC staff's RAIs in letters dated August 
26, 2002, and November 24, 2008, the NRC staff finds that the potential 
impacts of reinstating the CPs and completing construction of BLN Units 
1 and 2 would have no adverse effect on historic and archaeological 
resources.

Socioeconomic Impacts

    Socioeconomic impacts from the proposed reinstatement of the CPs 
and completing the construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 include an 
increase in the size of the workforce at BLN and associated increased 
demand for public services and housing in the region.
    In its August 26, 2002, response to an RAI, TVA estimated that the 
number of workers needed to complete the construction of BLN Units 1 
and 2 could peak at about 4600 workers; comprised of approximately 2600 
construction workers, 900 engineers, 850 plant staff, and 250 start-up 
testing staff. Most construction workers would relocate temporarily to 
Jackson County resulting in a short-term increase in population along 
with increased demands for public services and housing. TVA confirmed 
this estimate in a letter to the NRC dated November 24, 2008, and 
provided additional demographic information. Because construction work 
would be short-term, most construction workers would stay in rental 
homes, apartments, mobile homes, and camper-trailers. According to 2000 
Census information, there were over 46,000 vacant housing units in the 
50-mile radius of BLN, including over 2500 vacant housing units in 
Jackson County, that could potentially ease the demand for local rental 
housing should construction activities resume.
    TVA has acknowledged in its November 24, 2008, letter that 
completing the construction activities of BLN Units 1 and 2 may require 
greater than anticipated numbers of construction workers, which could 
significantly affect the availability of public services (i.e., 
schools, transportation, police and fire services, road infrastructure, 
water supplies, etc.). Reinstatement of the CPs and completing the 
construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 could, therefore, result in greater 
socioeconomic impacts than those projected in the 1974 FES. However, 
these impacts would have a relatively short duration. TVA has also 
committed to monitor the situation and work with local and state 
officials to mitigate any unacceptable adverse socioeconomic impacts 
that might result according to the TVA letter dated November 24, 2008.
    Based on a review of the information provided by TVA and relevant 
census data, the NRC staff concludes that reinstating the CPs and 
completing the construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 would not result in 
adverse socioeconomic impacts.

Environmental Justice

    The environmental justice impact analysis evaluates the potential 
for disproportionately high and adverse human health and environmental 
effects on minority and low-income populations that could result from 
reinstating the CPs and completing the construction of BLN Units 1 and 
2. Adverse health effects are measured in terms of the risk and rate of 
fatal or nonfatal adverse impacts on human health.
    Disproportionately high and adverse human health effects occur when 
the risk or rate of exposure to an environmental hazard for a minority 
or low-income population is significant and exceeds the risk or 
exposure rate for the general population or for another appropriate 
comparison group. A disproportionately high environmental impact that 
is significant refers to an impact or risk of an impact on the natural 
or physical environment in a low-income or minority community that 
appreciably exceeds the environmental impact on the larger community. 
Such effects may include ecological, cultural, human health, economic, 
or social impacts. Some of these potential effects have been identified 
in resource areas discussed in this EA. For example, increased demand 
for rental housing during construction could disproportionately affect 
low-income populations. Minority and low-income populations are subsets 
of the general public residing around BLN, and all are exposed to the 
same health and environmental effects generated from construction 
activities at BLN.
    Minority Populations in the Vicinity of BLN--According to 2000 
census data, 18.9 percent of the population (approximately 1,083,000 
individuals) residing within a 50-mile radius of BLN identified 
themselves as minority individuals. The largest minority group was 
Black or African American (157,000 persons or 14.5 percent), followed 
by Hispanic or Latino of any race (24,000 or about 2.2 percent). About 
8.1 percent of the Jackson County population identified themselves as 
minorities, with Black or African American the largest minority group 
(3.7 percent)

[[Page 9311]]

followed by Hispanic or Latino (1.1 percent) according to the U.S. 
Census Bureau (USCB). According to USCB census data estimates for 2006, 
the minority population of Jackson County, as a percent of total 
population, had increased to 9.2 percent.
    Low-Income Populations in the Vicinity of BLN--According to 2000 
census data, approximately 32,000 families and 143,000 individuals 
(approximately 10.5 and 13.2 percent, respectively) residing within a 
50-mile radius of BLN were identified as living below the Federal 
poverty threshold in 1999. The 1999 Federal poverty threshold was 
$17,029 for a family of four.
    According to census data, the median household income for Alabama 
in 2004 was $37,062, while 16.1 percent of the state population was 
determined to be living below the Federal poverty threshold. Jackson 
County had a lower median household income ($33,733) and a lower 
percentage (15.3 percent) of individuals living below the poverty 
level.
    Impact Analysis--Potential impacts to minority and low-income 
populations due to the reinstatement of the CPs and completing the 
construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 would mostly consist of environmental 
and socioeconomic effects (e.g., noise, dust, traffic, employment, and 
housing impacts).
    Since most of the construction work at BLN has been completed, 
noise and dust impacts would be short-term and limited to onsite 
activities. Minority and low-income populations residing along site 
access roads could experience increased commuter vehicle traffic during 
shift changes. As employment increases at BLN during completion of BLN 
Units 1 and 2, employment opportunities for minority and low-income 
populations may also increase. Increased demand for rental housing 
during peak construction could disproportionately affect low-income 
populations. However, according to the latest census information, there 
were over 46,000 vacant housing units in the 50-mile radius of BLN, 
including over 2500 vacant housing units in Jackson County.
    Based on this information and the analysis of human health and 
environmental impacts presented in this EA, there would be no 
disproportionately high and adverse impacts to minority and low-income 
populations from the reinstatement of the CPs and completing the 
construction of the BLN Units 1 and 2.

Impacts on Water Resources

    Water resource impacts due to reinstating BLN Units 1 and 2 CPs 
would be relatively small. Water discharges are governed by the plant's 
current National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit 
and waste streams controlled by the current Resource Conservation and 
Recovery Act (RCRA) permit; these permits remain active. TVA would 
continue to purchase drinking water from the City of Hollywood, 
Alabama, which is a community public water system that is regulated by 
the State of Alabama. TVA would continue to route waste water from the 
BLN Units 1 and 2 to the Hollywood Sewer System.
    By letter dated November 24, 2008, TVA confirmed that almost all 
environmental disturbances related to construction have already 
occurred, and that any impacts to natural resources, including water 
resources, would remain bounded by its assessment in the 1974 FES.
    Based on the information provided, the staff expects that there 
would be little or no impact to aquatic resources because the majority 
of construction activities have already been completed.

Impacts on Air Quality

    Main sources for the potential impacts on air quality due to 
reinstatement of the CPs for BLN would be fugitive dust from 
construction activities, associated with the project and exhaust 
emissions from the motorized equipment and vehicles of workers. The 
1990 Clean Air Act amendments include a provision that no Federal 
agency shall support any activity that does not conform to a state 
implementation plan designed to achieve the National Ambient Air 
Quality Standards for criteria pollutants (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen 
dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, lead, and particulate matter less than 
10 in diameter). On November 30, 1993, the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final rule (58 FR 63214) implementing 
the new statutory requirements, effective January 31, 1994. The final 
rule requires that Federal agencies prepare a written conformity 
analysis and determination for each pollutant where the total of direct 
and indirect emissions caused by proposed federal action \1\ would 
exceed established threshold emission levels in a nonattainment \2\ or 
maintenance area.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Federal action means any activity engaged in by a 
department, agency or instrumentality of the Federal Government, or 
any activity that a department, agency or instrumentality of the 
Federal Government supports in any way, provides financial 
assistance for, licenses, permits, or approves, other than 
activities related to transportation plans, programs, and projects 
developed, funded, or approved under title 23 U.S.C or the Federal 
Transit Act (49 U.S.C 1601 et seq.). (40 CFR 51.852)
    \2\ An area is designated ``nonattainment'' for a criteria 
pollutant if it does not meet National Ambient Air Quality Standards 
(NAAQS) for the pollutant.
    \3\ A maintenance area has been redesignated by a State from 
nonattainment to attainment; the State must submit to EPA a plan for 
maintaining NAAQS as a revision to its State Implementation Plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Construction activities are known to cause localized temporary 
increases in atmospheric concentrations of nitrogen oxides, carbon 
monoxide, sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, ammonia and 
particulate matter PM10 and PM2.5 as a result of 
exhaust emissions of worker's vehicles, diesel generators, and 
construction equipment. In accordance with the Clean Air Act, Federal 
agencies are prohibited from issuing a license for any activity that 
does not conform to an applicable implementation plan (40 CFR Parts 51 
and 93). Since the plant is located in a PM2.5 nonattainment 
area, BLN must show conformity to applicable Alabama State 
Implementation Plans by analyzing vehicles exhaust emissions (using an 
approved EPA model) that will occur during construction of BLN Units 1 
and 2.
    During potential construction of BLN Units 1 and 2, some ground-
clearing, grading, excavation, and movement of materials and machinery 
are expected to occur. Ground-clearing, grading, and excavation 
activities will raise dust, as will the movement of materials and 
machinery. Fugitive dust may also rise from cleared areas during windy 
periods. If any open burning is planned then the applicable permits 
would need to be obtained from the Air Division of the Alabama 
Department of Environmental Management. Normally, construction 
activities take place for a limited duration; if reinstated, the 
expiration completion date for BLN Unit 1 CP is October 1, 2011, and 
the expiration completion date for BLN Unit 2 CP is October 1, 2014, as 
specified in an NRC Order dated March 4, 2003. Any impacts on air 
quality that might occur would be temporary.
    Because the NRC staff expects that any potential construction 
activities at BLN Units 1 and 2 would conform to the Alabama 
Implementation plans, the NRC staff concludes that the impacts of 
construction activities on air quality would then be low. For such 
activities, the NRC staff notes a variety of mitigation measures, such 
as wetting of unpaved roads and construction areas during dry periods 
and seeding or mulching bare areas, inspection and

[[Page 9312]]

maintenance of the gasoline or diesel fuel fired construction equipment 
to prevent excessive exhaust emissions and shift changes for workforce 
to reduce the number of vehicles on the road at any given time, that 
could mitigate potential air quality impacts resulting from the 
potential reinstatement and construction completion at BLN Units 1 and 
2.

Impacts on Aquatic Resources

    In a TVA letter dated September 25, 2008, TVA indicates that TVA 
proposes ``no new ground disturbance,'' possibly a small amount of 
earthwork adjacent to existing building to support air compressors, and 
possibly ``reintroduction'' of small amounts of lubricating oil. The 
TVA letter dated September 25, 2008, does not indicate that the 
reinstatement of the CPs and construction would result in any 
activities involving transmission lines, such as maintenance, nor does 
it indicate any on-site activities other than those listed above. The 
activities described in the TVA letter, would be of such limited 
geographic extent and of such removal from aquatic habitats that the 
NRC staff expects that there would be little to no impact to aquatic 
resources.
    By letter dated November 24, 2008, TVA provided additional 
information to confirm that most site disturbance has already occurred, 
and that any impacts to natural resources, including aquatic resources, 
would remain bounded by the impacts discussed in the 1974 FES.
    Based on the information provided, the NRC staff expects that there 
would be little to no impact to aquatic resources based on the limited 
geographic extent and area affected.

Threatened and Endangered Aquatic Species

    By letter dated November 24, 2008, TVA updated the list of 
threatened or endangered species and concluded that except for the gray 
bat, none of the federally listed species are known to occur at or 
adjacent to the BLN site. Although threatened and endangered aquatic 
species are listed as occurring in Jackson County, the NRC staff 
confirmed with the Alabama State Department of Conservation and Natural 
Resources (DCNR) that there were no aquatic species listed as 
threatened or endangered in the immediate vicinity of BLN.

Impacts on Terrestrial Biota

    Since most of the construction has been completed, limited impacts 
may occur to terrestrial biota related to the potential realignment by 
1200 feet (370 meters) of the southern entrance to the plant and by the 
excavation of borrow pits in a wooded area east of the existing main 
power plant buildings. Reinstating the CPs and completing construction 
of the BLN Units 1 and 2 would remain within the scope of the 1974 FES, 
assuming that TVA implements the preconstruction and construction 
monitoring program for both aquatic and terrestrial resources as 
described in the 1974 FES. This would also cover potential impacts to 
terrestrial biota from transmission line right-of-way maintenance. The 
1974 FES considered all potential impacts associated with the 
transmission line and noted that TVA's transmission line maintenance 
and construction methods, particularly overspray during herbicide 
applications, had resulted in damage to trees located outside of the 
transmission line corridor. However, current best management practices 
(BMPs) employed by most industries today would mitigate such 
environmental impacts from pesticide or herbicide applications.
    Assuming that these practices for transmission line right-of-way 
would be in place if the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2 were reinstated, the 
NRC staff anticipates little to no impact on terrestrial biota, 
including wetland areas. By letter dated November 24, 2008, TVA 
confirmed that impacts to terrestrial resources would remain bounded by 
the assessment in the 1974 FES.

Endangered Terrestrial Species

    In a NRC EA dated January 24, 2003 (68 FR 3571), for extension of 
expiration dates of the BLN CPs, the NRC staff found that the 
endangered Gray Bat (Myotis grisescens) is the only species on the 
Federal list of endangered species known to occur in the vicinity of 
the Bellefonte site or within its transmission line corridors. The Gray 
Bat uses the sloughs and main channel of the Tennessee River near the 
BLN site to forage according to the NRC EA, dated January 24, 2003, and 
an Alabama State DCNR letter, dated October 15, 2008. The NRC EA, dated 
January 24, 2003, found that construction activities planned at that 
time would not be expected to cause any adverse impacts to the Grey Bat 
or its habitat.
    There is a Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) nest located less 
than 2 miles (3 kilometers) northeast of the BLN site, but the Bald 
Eagle was recently removed from the Federal list of threatened and 
endangered species. However, the Bald Eagle is still protected under 
the Federal Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
    According to the NRC EA, dated January 24, 2003, population levels 
of Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) have been increasing on Guntersville 
Lake, and several nests have been observed in the vicinity of Coon and 
Crow Creeks. Ospreys would use shoreline habitats fronting the BLN site 
for foraging. While not a species listed as threatened or endangered, 
the Osprey is protected along with the Bald Eagle under the Alabama 
State Nongame Species Regulation according to Alabama State DCNR 
letter, dated October 15, 2008.
    Based on this information, and TVA's response to the RAI dated 
November 24, 2008, the NRC staff concludes that resumption of 
construction activities at the BLN site are not likely to have any 
significant adverse effect on any listed species or other species 
mentioned above, because the majority of ground or river disturbance 
from construction activities have already been completed.

Nonradiological Impacts Summary

    Reinstatement of the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2 would not result in 
a significant change in nonradiological impacts in the areas of land 
use, water use, waste discharges, terrestrial and aquatic biota, 
transmission facility operation, social and economic factors, and 
environmental justice related to resumption of construction operations 
at the power plants. No other nonradiological impacts were identified 
or would be expected. Table 1 summarizes the nonradiological 
environmental impacts of the proposed reinstatement of the CPs for BLN 
Units 1 and 2.

        Table 1--Summary of Nonradiological Environmental Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Land use.....................  No impact to land use conditions and
                                aesthetic resources in the vicinity of
                                BLN.
Historic and Archaeological    No impact to historic and archaeological
 Resources.                     resources in the vicinity of BLN.
Socioeconomics...............  Workforce required to complete BLN could
                                have a profound effect on the
                                availability of public services and
                                rental housing in the vicinity of the
                                plant. TVA is committed to monitoring
                                the situation and to working with local
                                and state officials to mitigate any
                                unacceptable adverse socioeconomic
                                conditions.

[[Page 9313]]

 
Environmental Justice........  There would be no disproportionately high
                                and adverse impact on minority and low-
                                income populations in the vicinity of
                                BLN.
Water Use....................  Water use during completion of
                                construction would be relatively minor.
                                No changes from previous impact
                                evaluations are expected.
Air Quality..................  Temporary impacts from fugitive dust
                                related to construction and vehicle
                                emissions related to construction
                                workers traveling to and from BLN.
Aquatic Resources............  Little to no impact to listed species
                                since most external construction is
                                completed.
Terrestrial Biota............  Little to no impact to listed species
                                since most external construction is
                                completed.
Threatened and Endangered      Little to no impact to listed species
 Species.                       since most external construction is
                                completed.
Transmission Facilities......  Little to no impact to terrestrial and
                                aquatic resources if current BMPs are
                                incorporated into management plan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Radiological Impacts

Radioactive Effluent and Solid Waste Impacts

    Nuclear power plants use waste treatment systems designed to 
collect, process, and dispose of gaseous, liquid, and solid wastes that 
might contain radioactive material in a safe and controlled manner such 
that discharges are in accordance with the requirements of Title 10 of 
10 CFR Part 20, ``Standards for Protection Against Radiation'', and 10 
CFR Part 50, ``Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization 
Facilities'', Appendix I.
    Since construction activities will not involve any radioactive 
effluent and solid waste, the staff determined that reinstatement of 
the CPs and construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 would not result in any 
radiological effluent and solid waste since the BLN Units 1 and 2 would 
not be operating. Disposal of essentially all of the hazardous 
chemicals used at nuclear power plants is also regulated by RCRA or 
NPDES permits.

Occupational Radiation Doses

    Occupational exposures to plant workers conducting activities 
involving radioactively contaminated systems or working in radiation 
areas can be exposed to radiation. However, reinstatement of the CPs 
and construction activities will not involve any radioactive material; 
the NRC staff determined that occupational doses can be maintained 
within the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 for the reinstatement of the CPs 
and construction of BLN Units 1 and 2.

Public Radiation Doses

    Since construction activities will not involve any radioactive 
material, the staff determined that public radiation doses can be 
maintained within the limits of 10 CFR Part 100 for the reinstatement 
of the CPs and construction of BLN Units 1 and 2.

Postulated Accident Doses

    Since construction activities will not involve operation of BLN 
Units 1 and 2, the staff determined that there will be no postulated 
accident doses for the reinstatement of the CPs and construction of BLN 
Units 1 and 2.

Uranium Fuel Cycle and Transportation Impacts

    Since construction activities will not involve operation of BLN 
Units 1 and 2, the staff determined that there would be no 
environmental impact of the fuel cycle and transportation of fuels and 
wastes for the reinstatement of the CPs and construction of BLN Units 1 
and 2.

Radiological Impacts Summary

    The proposed reinstatement of the CPs and construction of BLN Units 
1 and 2 would not result in an impact associated with radiological 
effluent and solid waste, or occupational and public radiation 
exposure, or the uranium fuel cycle and transportation. In addition, 
TVA confirmed in its response to the RAI dated November 24, 2008, that 
there are no changes or updates related to radiological impacts, beyond 
those assessed in the 1974 FES, associated with the proposed 
reinstatement of the CPs and construction of BLN Units 1 and 2.
    Accordingly, the NRC staff concludes that there are no adverse 
impacts associated with the proposed reinstatement of the CPs and 
construction of BLN Units 1 and 2. Table 2 summarizes the radiological 
environmental impacts of the proposed reinstatement of the CPs and 
construction of BLN Units 1 and 2.

         Table 2--Summary of Radiological Environmental Impacts
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupational Radiation Doses.....  No adverse impacts.
Public Radiation Doses...........  No adverse impacts.
Postulated Accident Doses........  No adverse impacts.
Uranium Fuel Cycle and             No adverse impacts.
 Transportation Impacts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cumulative Impacts

    A cumulative impact is defined in Council of Environmental Quality 
regulations (40 CFR 1508.7) as ``an impact on the environment which 
results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other 
past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of 
what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other 
actions.'' The NRC staff has considered past, present, and reasonably 
foreseeable future actions in this review for cumulative impacts on the 
environment. Should TVA receive approval by the NRC and decide to 
construct one or two new nuclear power plant units at the Bellefonte 
site (BLN Unit 1 and/or Unit 2), the cumulative impact would result 
from construction activities in the immediate vicinity of the site.
    The NRC staff has conducted a review of past, present, and the 
foreseeable future action of reinstatement of the CPs and construction 
for BLN Unit 1 and 2. The NRC staff determined runoff from the land 
area around the main construction site drains into an unnamed 
tributary, wetland, and the intake. Topographical flow gradient is 
following the natural elevation not planned for land excavation or 
disturbance. Cumulative impacts of normal construction of the proposed 
facilities for BLN Units 1 and 2 were evaluated for water resources, 
air quality, health and safety, waste

[[Page 9314]]

generation, resource use, and environmental justice including 
cumulative impacts for water quality, geologic resources, ecological 
resources, aesthetic resources. These were explicitly addressed and the 
NRC staff notes direct and indirect impacts to these resources are 
expected to be negligible. Cumulative impacts from proposed facility 
construction reinstatement of the CPs and construction activities are 
not expected to be significant. In addition, the cumulative impacts of 
the proposed facilities to land development, electricity usage, and 
water usage would be quite small.
    If construction resumes, TVA plans 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 that is about 
1200 feet east of the current connection point. This change 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.
    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.
    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.
    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.
    If the CPs are reinstated, the expiration completion date for BLN 
Unit 1 CP is October 1, 2011, and the expiration completion date for 
BLN Unit 2 CP is October 1, 2014, as specified in a NRC Order dated 
March 4, 2003.
    Therefore, it is anticipated that the potential cumulative impacts 
from reinstatement of the CPs and construction of BLN Units 1 and 2 
would be small and no mitigation would be required.
    One of the considered actions involves an application to build two 
new nuclear units at the Bellefonte site (BLN Units 3 and 4). By letter 
dated October 30, 2007, TVA submitted its application for a Combined 
License (COL) for Bellefonte Units 3 and 4; this application is 
currently under review by the Office of New Reactors.
    On August 27, 2008, TVA legal counsel notified Atomic Safety and 
Licensing Board Panel, reviewing the matter of BLN 3 and 4, that TVA 
has requested to reinstate the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2 in a letter 
dated August 26, 2008.
    At this juncture, the TVA request that the NRC reinstate the CPs 
for BLN Units 1 and 2 does not constitute a ``proposal'' that is 
interdependent with the BLN Units 3 and 4 COL application that is 
before the agency. The TVA request to reinstate the CP for BLN Units 1 
and 2 fails to constitute a ``proposal'' of the type that would trigger 
a NEPA cumulative impact analysis regarding Units 1 and 2 in the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) analysis for proposed BLN 
Units 3 and 4. If construction activities resume for BLN Units 1 and 2, 
TVA would need to assess the BLN Units 1 and 2 construction impacts 
relative to BLN Units 3 and 4.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    There are four possibilities for reinstatement of the CPs and 
construction: (1) Both BLN Units 1 and 2 (the proposed action, which 
bounds possibilities 2 and 3), (2) BLN Unit 1 only, (3) BLN Unit 2 
only, and (4) neither BLN Unit 1 or Unit 2.
    A possible alternative to the proposed action of reinstatement of 
the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2 would be to reinstate only one CP; this 
alternative is bounded by the proposed action.
    Another possible alternative to the proposed action of 
reinstatement of the CPs for BLN Units 1 and 2 would be to deny the 
request of reinstatement of the CPs. This option would not eliminate 
the environmental impacts of construction that have already occurred, 
and would only limit the additional construction that has been 
determined to have little to no impact on aquatic and terrestrial 
resources including endangered species, to hydrology, archaeology, land 
use, and transmission line maintenance, and temporary air impacts from 
fugitive dust and emissions from construction workers traveling to and 
from the site. If the request was denied, there would be no adverse 
socioeconomic impacts; there could be an increase in the availability 
of public services and rental housing in the vicinity of the plant. If 
the request was denied, there would be no adverse impacts to 
environmental justice; the environmental justice impact analysis 
evaluates the potential for disproportionately high and adverse human 
health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations 
that could result from completing the construction of BLN Units 1 and 
2.

Alternative Use of Resources

    This action does not involve the use of any resources not 
previously considered in the original FES for construction.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on October 15, 2008, the NRC 
staff consulted with the Alabama State officials, Mr. Keith Hudson and 
Ms. Ashley Peters, of the Alabama Department of Conservation and 
Natural Resources, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed 
action. The state officials had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

    On the basis of the EA, the Commission concludes that the proposed 
action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human 
environment. Accordingly, the Commission 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 letters, dated August 16, 2006, September 25, 2008, and 
November 24, 2008. Documents may be examined, and/or copied for a fee, 
at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), located at One White Flint 
North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 
Publicly available records will be accessible electronically from the 
Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Public 
Electronic Reading Room on 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 at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737, 
or send an e-mail to [email protected].

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24 day of February 2008.


[[Page 9315]]


    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
L. Raghavan,
Chief, Special Projects Branch, Division of Operating Reactor 
Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
 [FR Doc. E9-4441 Filed 3-2-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P