[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 27 (Wednesday, February 10, 2010)]
[Pages 6736-6737]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2975]



[Docket Nos. 50-334 and 50-412; NRC-2010-0049]

FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company, FirstEnergy Nuclear 
Generation Corp., Ohio Edison Company, the Toledo Edison Company, 
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; 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 a certain new requirement of 10 CFR Part 73, 
``Physical protection of plants and materials,'' for Renewed Facility 
Operating License Nos. DPR-66 and NPF-73, issued to FirstEnergy Nuclear 
Operating Company (licensee), for operation of the Beaver Valley Power 
Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (BVPS-1 and 2), located in Shippingport, 
Pennsylvania. In accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared an 
environmental assessment documenting its finding. The NRC concluded 
that the proposed actions will have no significant environmental 

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action

    The proposed action would exempt BVPS-1 and 2 from the required 
implementation date of March 31, 2010, for a certain new requirement of 
10 CFR part 73. Specifically, BVPS-1 and 2 would be granted an 
exemption from being in full compliance with a certain new requirement 
contained in 10 CFR 73.55 by the March 31, 2010, implementation 
deadline. The licensee has proposed an alternate full compliance 
implementation date of December 17, 2010, approximately 9 months beyond 
the date required by 10 CFR part 73. The proposed action, an extension 
of the schedule for completion of certain actions required by the 
revised 10 CFR part 73, does not involve any physical changes to the 
reactor, fuel, plant structures, support structures, water, or land at 
the BVPS-1 and 2 site.
    The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's 
application dated November 30, 2009 (Agencywide Document and Management 
System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML093370152), as supplemented by letter 
dated December 23, 2009 (ADAMS Accession No. ML093650293).

The Need for the Proposed Action

    The proposed action is needed to provide the licensee with 
additional time to design the necessary modifications, procure 
equipment and material, and implement upgrades to comply with a 
specific aspect of 10 CFR 73.55.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    The NRC has completed its environmental assessment of the proposed 
exemption. The NRC 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 Magnuson-Steven'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 licensee currently maintains security plans acceptable to the 
NRC. The new 10 CFR part 73 security measures that would be implemented 
by March 31, 2010, would continue to provide acceptable onsite physical 
protection of BVPS-1 and 2. Therefore, the extension of the 
implementation date of a certain new requirement of 10 CFR part 73, to 
September 27, 2010, would not have any significant environmental 
    The NRC staff's safety evaluation will be provided in the exemption 
that will be issued as part of the letter to the licensee approving the 
exemption to the regulation, if granted.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As an alternative to the proposed actions, the NRC staff considered 
denial of the proposed actions (i.e., the ``no-action'' alternative). 
Denial of the exemption request would result in no change in current 
environmental impacts. If the proposed action was denied, the licensee 
would have to comply with the March 31, 2010, implementation deadline. 
The environmental impacts of the proposed exemption and the ``no 
action'' alternative are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources

    The action does not involve the use of any different resources than 
those considered in the Final Environmental Statement for BVPS-1, dated 
July 1973, and for BVPS-2, NUREG-1094, dated September 1985, as 
supplemented through the ``Generic Environmental Impact Statement for 
License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Beaver Valley Power 
Station, Units 1 and 2, Supplement 36, Final Report'' (NUREG-1437).

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    In accordance with its stated policy, on January 20, 2010, the NRC 
staff consulted with Larry Ryan of the Pennsylvania Department of 
Environmental Protection, regarding the environmental impact of the 
proposed action. The State official had no comments.

[[Page 6737]]

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 
    For further details with respect to the proposed action, see the 
licensee's letter dated November 30, 2009, as supplemented by letter 
dated December 23, 2009. Portions of the submittals contain proprietary 
and security information and, accordingly, are not available to the 
public, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.390. The public documents may be examined, 
and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR), 
located at One White Flint North, Public File Area O-1F21, 11555 
Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. Publicly 
available records will be accessible electronically from the ADAMS 
Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at the NRC Web site: 

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 4th day of February 2010.

    For The Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Nadiyah S. Morgan,
Project Manager, Plant Licensing Branch I-1, Division of Operating 
Reactor Licensing, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
[FR Doc. 2010-2975 Filed 2-9-10; 8:45 am]