[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 230 (Thursday, November 29, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 71198-71199]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28888]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50-133; NRC-2012-0288]


Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact 
Related to Exemption From the Implementation Deadline for Certain New 
Emergency Preparedness Regulations for the Humboldt Bay Power Plant, 
Unit No. 3, License DPR-007, Eureka, CA

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact; 
issuance.

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

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John Hickman, Division of Waste 
Management and Environmental Protection, Office of Federal and State 
Materials and Environmental Management Programs; U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission, Mail Stop: T8F5, Washington, DC 20555-00001; 
telephone: 301-415-3017; email: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Introduction

    The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering a 
request dated June 19, 2012, by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E, 
the licensee) for a schedular exemption which would extend the date for 
implementing portions of the Final Rule for Enhancements to Emergency 
Preparedness Regulations (Final Rule) from June 20, 2012 to September 
20, 2012.
    This Environmental Assessment (EA) has been developed in accordance 
with the requirements of section 51.21 of Title 10 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (10 CFR).

II. Environmental Assessment

Identification of Proposed Action

    On July 2, 1976, Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) Unit 3 was shut 
down for annual refueling and to conduct seismic modifications. The 
unit was never restarted. In 1983, updated economic analyses indicated 
that restarting Unit 3 would probably not be cost-effective, and in 
June 1983, PG&E announced its intention to decommission the unit. On 
July 16, 1985, the NRC issued Amendment No. 19 to the HBPP Unit 3 
Operating License to change the status to possess-but-not-operate 
(Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession 
No. ML8507260045). In December of 2008, the transfer of spent fuel from 
the fuel storage pool to the dry-cask Independent Spent Fuel Storage 
Installation (ISFSI) was completed, and the decontamination and 
dismantlement phase of HBPP Unit 3 decommissioning commenced. Active 
decommissioning is currently underway.
    The NRC issued the Final Rule in the Federal Register on November 
23, 2011 (76 FR 72560). The Final Rule amends certain emergency 
preparedness (EP) requirements in the regulations. The amended 
requirements enhance the ability of licensees in preparing to take and 
taking certain EP and protective measures in the event of a 
radiological emergency; address, in part, security issues identified 
after the terrorist events of September 11, 2001; clarify regulations 
to effect consistent emergency plan implementation among licensees; and 
modify certain EP requirements to be more effective and efficient. 
Certain portions of the Final Rule are required to be implemented by 
June 20, 2012, while other portions of the Final Rule have later 
implementation dates. The PG&E is requesting the schedular exemption to 
allow sufficient time to evaluate the Final Rule and to implement 
provisions, as necessary. The proposed exemption would provide only 
temporary relief from the applicable regulation. Specifically, PG&E 
requests exemptions from meeting the implementation deadline for the 
following revised requirements:
    For Security-Related Emergency Plan Issues:
    Emergency Action Levels for Hostile Action (10 CFR Part 50, App. E, 
IV.B.1.)
    Emergency Response Organization Augmentation at Alternate 
Facility--capability for staging emergency organization personnel at an 
alternate facility and the capability for communications with the 
control room

[[Page 71199]]

and plant security (10 CFR Part 50, App. E, IV.E.8.d.)
    Protection for Onsite Personnel (10 CFR Part 50, App. E, IV.I)
    For Non-Security Related Issues:
    Emergency Declaration Timeliness (10 CFR Part 50, App. E, IV.C.2.)
    Emergency Operations Facility--Performance Based Approach (10 CFR 
Part 50, App. E, IV.E.8.a.-c.)

Need for Proposed Action

    The PG&E asserts that the Final Rule does not provide clear 
direction for defueled, non-operating facilities such as HBPP, and it 
does not include ISFSI license emergency plans. Therefore, PG&E is 
still evaluating the applicability of the Final Rule to HBPP.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action

    Due to HBPP being permanently shut down (with spent fuel relocated 
to the ISFSI) and the necessary 10 CFR Part 20 required radiological 
controls in place to limit doses, there are no postulated accidents for 
HBPP that are considered credible that could result in the release of 
radioactive materials to the environment in quantities that would 
require the implementation of protective actions for the general 
public. There are also no postulated accidents for the ISFSI that could 
result in the release of radioactive materials to the environment in 
quantities that would require the implementation of protective actions 
for the general public. Therefore, because the current Humboldt Bay 
site emergency program provides adequate radiological protection for 
the public, the delayed implementation of the five Final Rule 
requirements identified above presents no potential increase in release 
of radioactive materials to the environment in quantities that would 
require the implementation of protective actions for the general 
public.
    Because HBPP is permanently defueled and the spent fuel is stored 
in the onsite ISFSI, the NRC has determined that the plant site poses a 
significantly reduced risk to public health and safety from design 
basis accidents or credible beyond design basis accidents. (``Emergency 
Planning Licensing Requirements for Independent Spent Fuel Storage 
Facilities (ISFSI) and Monitored Retrievable Storage Facilities (MRS)'' 
(60 FR 32430, 32431; June 22, 1995)) The PG&E has stated that accidents 
cannot result in radioactive releases which exceed the EPA's protective 
action guidelines at the site boundary. Granting the proposed scheduler 
exemption would not increase the probability or consequences of 
accidents, no changes are being made in the types or quantities of 
effluents that may be released offsite, and there would be no increase 
in occupational or public radiation exposure. Therefore, there are no 
significant radiological environmental impacts associated with granting 
the exemption request.
    Granting the proposed schedular exemption would not affect non-
radiological plant effluents and would have no other environmental 
impact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological impacts 
associated with the proposed action.

Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Proposed Action

    As stated above there are no significant environmental impacts from 
the proposed action. Therefore, the only alternative the NRC considered 
is the no-action alternative, under which the NRC would deny the 
exemption request. This denial of the request would require the 
licensee to implement the revised emergency preparedness requirements 
immediately. The facility currently poses an insignificant 
environmental impact risk due to the permanently shutdown status with 
fuel in the ISFSI. Therefore, imposing more emergency preparedness 
requirements to further limit environmental impact would not result in 
a significant change in current environmental impacts. The 
environmental impacts of the proposed action and the no-action 
alternative are therefore similar and the no-action alternative is 
accordingly not further considered.

Conclusion

    The NRC has concluded that the proposed action will not 
significantly impact the quality of the human environment, and that the 
proposed action is the preferred alternative.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

    The NRC contacted the California Radiologic Health Branch in the 
State Department of Health Services concerning this request. There were 
no comments, concerns or objections from the State official.
    The NRC has determined that the proposed action is of a procedural 
nature, and will not affect listed species or critical habitat. 
Therefore, no further consultation is required under Section 7 of the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), 16 U.S.C. 1536. The 
NRC has also determined that the proposed action is not the type of 
activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic 
properties. Therefore, no further consultation is required under 
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as 
amended (NHPA), 16 U.S.C. 470.

III. Finding of No Significant Impact

    The NRC has prepared this EA in support of the proposed action. On 
the basis of this EA, the NRC finds that there are no significant 
environmental impacts from the proposed action, and that preparation of 
an environmental impact statement is not warranted. Accordingly, the 
NRC has determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is 
appropriate.

IV. Further Information

    Documents related to this action, including the application and 
supporting documentation, are available electronically at the NRC's 
Library at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site, 
you can access ADAMS, which provides text and image files of NRC's 
public documents. The documents related to this action are listed 
below, along with their ADAMS accession numbers.
    (1) Final rule, ``Enhancements to Emergency Preparedness 
Regulations,'' November 23, 2011. [76 FR 72560]
    (2) Letter dated June 19, 2012, ``Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 
Request for Schedular Exemption for Implementation of Final Rule for 
Enhancements to Emergency Preparedness Regulations'' [ADAMS Accession 
Number ML12187A235].
    If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are problems in 
accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact the NRC Public 
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or 
by email to [email protected]. These documents may also be viewed 
electronically on the public computers located at the NRC's PDR, O1-
F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. 
The PDR reproduction contractor will copy documents for a fee.

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day of November, 2012.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Larry W. Camper,
Director, Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection, 
Office of Federal and State Materials and Environmental Management 
Programs.
[FR Doc. 2012-28888 Filed 11-28-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P