[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 246 (Tuesday, December 26, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 61040-61043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27682]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 50-271; NRC-2015-0157]
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.; Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power
Station
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final environmental assessment and finding of no significant
impact; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing a
final environmental assessment (EA) and finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) regarding the issuance of two exemptions in response to
a January 6, 2015 request from Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
(Entergy or the licensee), on behalf of the owners of the Vermont
Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VY). The exemptions allow the licensee to
use funds from the VY decommissioning trust fund (the Trust) for
irradiated fuel management activities.
DATES: The EA and FONSI referenced in this documents are available on
December 26, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2015-0157 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking website: Go to http://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2015-0157. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: [email protected]. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to [email protected]. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced (if it is available
in ADAMS) is provided the first time that it is mentioned in this
document.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jack D. Parrott, Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-6634; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Introduction
On June 23, 2015 (80 FR 35992), the NRC issued exemptions from
sections 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) and 50.75(h)(1)(iv) of title 10 of the Code
of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) to Entergy, for VY's Renewed Facility
Operating License No. DPR-28. The VY facility is located in Windham
County, Vermont. The licensee requested the exemptions by letter dated
January 6, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15013A171). The exemptions allow
the licensee to use funds from the Trust for irradiated fuel management
activities, in the similar manner that funds from the Trust are used
under 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8) for decommissioning activities. As explained
below, although the exemptions also exempted VY from the regulatory
requirement for prior notification to the NRC of disbursements from the
Trust for irradiated fuel management activities, the licensee is still
required to provide such prior notification to the NRC because of a
separate requirement in the VY Renewed Facility Operating License.
At the time of issuance, the NRC's approval of the exemptions
referenced the categorical exclusion criteria under 10 CFR
51.22(c)(25). However, on November 4, 2015, the State of Vermont, the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation, and Green Mountain Power
Corporation (together, Petitioners) filed a petition (ADAMS Accession
No. ML16137A554) with the Commission that, in part, challenged the NRC
staff's use of a categorical exclusion in granting the exemption
request. The Commission, in their October 27, 2016 decision on the
petition (ADAMS Accession No. ML16301A083), found that the exemptions
were ineligible for a categorical exclusion under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and directed the staff to conduct an
EA to examine the environmental impacts, if any, associated with the
exemptions. Therefore, consistent with Commission direction and with 10
CFR 51.21, the NRC prepared a draft EA to document its environmental
review for the exemption request, and published the draft EA for
comment on March 8, 2017 (82 FR 13015). Comments were received from the
Petitioners on April 7, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No. ML17107A145). After
consideration of those comments, the staff has prepared this final EA.
Based on the results of this final EA, the NRC has determined that it
is not necessary to prepare an environmental impact statement and is
therefore issuing this final FONSI.
II. Final Environmental Assessment
Description of the Action
The exemptions requested by Entergy on January 6, 2015, and granted
by the NRC on June 23, 2015, exempt Entergy from the requirements set
forth in 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) and 50.75(h)(1)(iv). Specifically,
the exemptions allow Entergy to use funds from the Trust for irradiated
fuel management activities, not associated with radiological
decommissioning.
Need for the Action
By letter dated January 12, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15013A426),
Entergy informed the NRC that it had permanently ceased power
operations at VY and that the VY reactor vessel had been permanently
defueled.
In its January 6, 2015 exemption request, Entergy stated that it
needed access to the funds in the Trust, in excess of those funds
needed for radiological decommissioning, to support irradiated fuel
management activities not associated with radiological decommissioning.
As required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A), decommissioning trust funds
may be used by a licensee if the withdrawals are for expenses for
legitimate decommissioning activities consistent with the definition of
decommissioning in 10 CFR 50.2. This definition addresses radiological
decommissioning and does not include activities associated with
irradiated fuel management. Similarly, the requirements of 10 CFR
50.75(h)(1)(iv) restrict decommissioning trust fund disbursements
(other than for payments
[[Page 61041]]
of ordinary administrative costs and incidental expenses of the fund)
to decommissioning expenses until final decommissioning has been
completed. Therefore, Entergy needed exemptions from 10 CFR
50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) and 50.75(h)(1)(iv) to allow the use of funds from
the Trust for irradiated fuel management activities.
Environmental Impacts of the Action
The exemptions are of a financial nature and allow Entergy to use
funds from the Trust to pay for irradiated fuel management activities.
The exemptions do not authorize any additional regulatory or land-
disturbing activities, but do allow Entergy to finance irradiated fuel
management activities, which support decommissioning.
In granting the exemptions, the NRC staff performed an independent
analysis of the Trust and confirmed that the existing funds, planned
future contributions, and projected earnings of the Trust provide
reasonable assurance of adequate funding to complete all NRC required
decommissioning activities and to conduct irradiated fuel management.
Consequently, the staff concluded that application of the requirements
that funds from the Trust only be used for decommissioning activities
and not for irradiated fuel management was not necessary to provide
reasonable assurance that adequate funds will be available for the
radiological decommissioning of VY.
The staff conclusion is also supported by the fact that the
licensee has a comprehensive, regulation-based decommissioning funding
oversight program to provide reasonable assurance that sufficient
funding will be available for the radiological decommissioning of VY.
After submitting its site-specific Decommissioning Cost Estimate as
required by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(iii), and until completing its final
radiation survey and demonstrating that residual radioactivity has been
reduced to a level that permits termination of its license as required
by 10 CFR 50.82(a)(11), the licensee is required by 10 CFR
50.82(a)(8)(v) to annually submit to the NRC a financial assurance
status report. The report must include, among other things, amounts
spent on decommissioning, the remaining Trust balance, and estimated
costs to complete radiological decommissioning. If the remaining Trust
balance, plus earnings on such funds calculated at not greater than a 2
percent real rate of return, plus any other financial assurance methods
being relied upon, does not cover the estimated costs to complete
radiological decommissioning, 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(vi) requires that
additional financial assurance to cover the estimated costs to complete
radiological decommissioning must be provided. These annual reports
provide a means for the NRC to monitor the adequacy of the funding
available for the radiological decommissioning of VY notwithstanding
the exemptions allowing Entergy to use funds from the Trust for
irradiated fuel management activities.
Entergy also requested an exemption from the 10 CFR 50.75(h)(1)(iv)
requirement that no disbursements may be made from the Trust until
written notice of the intention to make the disbursement has been given
to the NRC at least 30 working days before the date of the intended
disbursement, except that notification is not required after
decommissioning has begun and withdrawals are made under 10 CFR
50.82(a)(8). The NRC granted this exemption. However, the granting of
this exemption did not relieve Entergy from a requirement for prior
notification of disbursements of funds from the Trust for irradiated
fuel management activities because of additional language in the VY
Renewed Facility Operating License and the VY Master Decommissioning
Trust Agreement. Specifically, in accordance with the VY Renewed
Facility Operating License (ADAMS Accession No. ML052720265), Condition
3.J.a.(iii), the decommissioning trust agreement must provide that no
disbursements or payments from the Trust, other than for ordinary
administrative expenses, shall be made by the trustee until the trustee
has first given the NRC 30 days prior written notice of payment.
Article IV, Section 4.05, of the VY Master Decommissioning Trust
Agreement (ADAMS Accession No. ML15111A086), by and between Entergy
Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, and The Bank of New York Mellon as
Trustee, provides that no disbursements or payments shall be made by
the Trustee, other than administrative expenses, until the Trustee has
first given the NRC 30 days prior written notice of payment. Although
Entergy had submitted a September 4, 2014 license amendment request to
delete License Condition 3.J.(a) and thus remove the prior notification
requirement (ADAMS Accession No. ML14254A405), Entergy withdrew this
license amendment request on September 22, 2015 (ADAMS Accession Nos.
ML15267A074 and ML15265A583). Therefore, License Condition 3.J.a.(iii)
remains in effect and, despite the granting of the exemptions, VY
remains subject to a prior notification requirement. Similar to the
annual financial assurance status reports, prior notifications provide
a means for the NRC to monitor the adequacy of the funding available
for the radiological decommissioning of VY notwithstanding the
exemptions allowing Entergy to use funds from the Trust for irradiated
fuel management activities.
The environmental impacts of decommissioning have been generically
evaluated by the NRC and documented in NUREG-0586, Supplement 1,
Generic Environmental Impact Statement [GEIS] on Decommissioning of
Nuclear Facilities (Decommissioning GEIS). Entergy's Post-Shutdown
Decommissioning Activity Report (PSDAR) (ADAMS Accession No.
ML14357A110) discussed that the impacts from the planned
decommissioning activities at VY are less than and bounded by the
impacts considered in the Decommissioning GEIS and NUREG-1496, Generic
Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological
Criteria for License Termination of NRC-Licensed Nuclear Facilities.
The NRC staff found that the PSDAR contained the required information,
including a discussion that provides the reasons for concluding that
the environmental impacts associated with the decommissioning
activities at VY will be bounded by previous analyses (ADAMS Accession
No. ML15343A210).
The exemptions do not authorize Entergy to perform new land-
disturbing activities that could affect land use, soils and geology,
water resources, ecological resources, or historic and cultural
resources. The exemptions do not authorize Entergy to conduct
additional regulatory activities, outside those already licensed by the
NRC; therefore, there are no incremental effects to air quality,
traffic and transportation, socioeconomics, environmental justice, or
accidents. The exemptions only change the source of funds allowed for
irradiated fuel management activities. This will not increase the
probability or consequences of accidents and, as a result of the
exemptions, there are no changes in the types or amounts of effluents
that are, or may be, released offsite. Entergy must continue to comply
with all appropriate NRC regulations related to occupational and public
radiation exposure and thus the exemptions will not result in an
increase to occupational or public doses. Finally, Entergy is required
to maintain adequate funding for the radiological decommissioning of VY
and to provide information regarding this funding to the NRC.
Accordingly,
[[Page 61042]]
the NRC concludes that there are no potential incremental environmental
impacts as a result of the granted exemptions.
Environmental Impacts of the Alternatives to the Action
As an alternative to the action, the NRC staff could have denied
Entergy's exemption request. Denial of the exemption request would have
resulted in Entergy using funds from the Trust only for radiological
decommissioning and not also for irradiated fuel management activities.
The environmental impacts of this alternative would be substantively
the same as the environmental impacts for granting the exemption
request because there are no potential incremental environmental
impacts as a result of granting the exemption request. Therefore, the
environmental impacts of the alternative to the action would be the
same as those already considered by the previous environmental
analyses.
Alternative Use of Resources
The action does not involve the use of any different resources than
those previously considered.
Agencies and Persons Consulted
The NRC issued for public comment a draft of the EA and FONSI in
the Federal Register on March 8, 2017 (82 FR 13015). Comments were
received from the Petitioners on April 7, 2017 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML17107A145).
Discussion of Comments
The NRC staff has summarized the Petitioners' comments and has
responded to them below.
Petitioners comment 1. NRC staff's EA and FONSI fail to address
numerous factors that trigger the need to prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement (EIS). NRC should withdraw the EA and FONSI, and the
approval of the exemption request granting approval to use the
decommissioning trust fund for spent fuel management, and proceed to
prepare an EIS that, among other things, addresses these comments and
brings NRC's actions into compliance with NEPA.
NRC response. The NRC disagrees with this comment. The NRC has
evaluated the environmental impacts of the exemptions in its EA and
concluded that the exemptions did not, and will not, have a significant
effect on the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC
has decided not to prepare an EIS for the action and is issuing a
FONSI. Therefore, the NRC staff will not withdraw the draft EA and
FONSI to prepare an EIS nor will the NRC staff withdraw the approval of
the exemption request. The staff's responses to the Petitioners'
comments that the EA and FONSI fail to address numerous factors
triggering the need to prepare an EIS are described below.
Petitioners comment 1.a. The sale of VY to NorthStar Nuclear
Decommissioning Company, LLC (NorthStar), and its resulting changes to
the plan, schedule, and cost estimate for decommissioning, is a
reasonably foreseeable event that must be considered in the EA. The NRC
ignored the pending sale of VY to NorthStar, and that sale's resulting
changes to the plan, schedule, and cost estimate for decommissioning
VY.
NRC response. The NRC disagrees with this comment. The NRC is aware
of the possible sale of VY to NorthStar, and that the sale may result
in changes to the plan, schedule, and cost estimate for
decommissioning. However, the NRC does not consider the sale reasonably
foreseeable for purposes of this EA. The sale transaction is still
pending regulatory review and approval by both the Vermont Public
Service Board and the NRC. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.80, the VY license may
not be transferred, either voluntarily or involuntarily, directly or
indirectly, through transfer of control of the license to any person,
unless the NRC gives its consent in writing. The license transfer
request related to the pending sale of VY to NorthStar is currently
under NRC review. For the NRC to evaluate the exemption request as if
approval of the license transfer request were ``reasonably
foreseeable'' would suggest that the NRC is inappropriately pre-judging
the merits of the license transfer request that is still under the
agency's review. Thus, the NRC does not consider it ``reasonably
foreseeable'' that the license transfer request will be approved by the
NRC and the Vermont Public Service Board. Accordingly, the NRC will not
consider the possible sale of VY to NorthStar for purposes of this EA.
Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 50.33(k), the license transfer request
is required to state information in the form of a report indicating how
reasonable assurance will be provided that funds will be available to
decommission the facility.
Petitioners comment 1.b. The EA fails to consider the reasonably
foreseeable possibility of a shortfall in the Trust resulting from
allowing $225 million or more from the Trust to be diverted to non-
decommissioning expenses. By allowing $225 million or more to be
diverted from the Trust for non-decommissioning expenses, the NRC has
greatly increased the chances of a shortfall in the Trust that could
leave the site radiologically contaminated.
NRC response. The NRC disagrees with this comment. In its
evaluation of the underlying exemption request (80 FR 35992), the NRC
staff performed an independent analysis of the Trust and confirmed that
the existing funds, planned future contributions, and projected
earnings of the Trust provide reasonable assurance of adequate funding
to complete all NRC required decommissioning activities and to conduct
irradiated fuel management in accordance with the VY Irradiated Fuel
Management Plan and PSDAR.
The NRC's regulations in 10 CFR 50.82 provide for the oversight of
decommissioning funding until decommissioning is complete and the
license is terminated. At all times, the licensee remains responsible
to assure that sufficient funding remains available for
decommissioning. Once a licensee has permanently ceased operations, it
is required to report its decommissioning funding status on an annual
basis. In these submittals, the licensee is required to report any
differences between the estimated costs to decommission the site, and
the amount of decommissioning funding available or anticipated at that
time, including plans for making up any identified shortfalls.
Independent of these submittals, the NRC staff will validate the
licensee's reporting of this information and review the Trust status
against any new information regarding radiological contamination at the
site and the ability to meet the requirements for release of the site
for unrestricted use. Any unanticipated Trust shortfalls must be
covered by the licensee. Should the licensee fail to cover a shortfall,
the NRC may pursue enforcement methods as determined to be appropriate.
Given the NRC's regulatory framework for decommissioning funding
assurance and the NRC's reasonable assurance findings in its evaluation
of the exemption request, the NRC does not consider a shortfall in the
Trust resulting from the exemptions to be reasonably foreseeable.
Therefore, the Petitioners' comments suggesting that the NRC has
greatly increased the chances of a shortfall in the Trust that could
leave the site radiologically contaminated are unsupported and
speculative.
Petitioners comment 1.c. The EA fails to consider cumulative
impacts resulting from all of the non-decommissioning expenses Entergy
withdraws from the Trust. The EA looks only at one of Entergy's uses of
the Trust for a non-decommissioning expense (spent fuel management).
NRC staff
[[Page 61043]]
simply provided conclusory statements supporting its position.
NRC response. The NRC disagrees with this comment. The EA
appropriately considered all withdrawals from the decommissioning trust
that would be permissible under the NRC's regulations and under the
exemptions. Specifically, the EA considered withdrawals for
decommissioning expenses, which are permitted by the NRC's regulations,
and withdrawals for spent fuel management expenses, which are permitted
by the exemptions. The EA did not consider withdrawals for any non-
decommissioning expenses beyond spent fuel management expenses, because
such withdrawals are prohibited by the NRC's regulations and are not
allowed by the exemptions. In addition, this scope of the EA is
appropriate because the NRC staff reviews the status of decommissioning
funds annually during decommissioning to ensure that adequate funds for
decommissioning are available and that withdrawals from the
decommissioning fund are for approved purposes. Finally, the cumulative
impacts of decommissioning were considered in the Decommissioning GEIS.
Therefore, the EA's consideration of impacts was appropriate.
Petitioners comment 1.d. The EA fails to consider reasonable
alternatives. The only alternative that the NRC staff evaluated was
denying Entergy's exemption request. The NRC staff failed to evaluate
other alternatives, such as granting conditional approval.
NRC response. The NRC disagrees that the EA fails to consider
reasonable alternatives. The exemptions at issue here allow Entergy to
use funds from the Trust for the non-decommissioning expense of
irradiated fuel management activities. This EA evaluates denying the
exemption request as a reasonable alternative to the action of granting
the exemption request. Consistent with the NRC's regulations, imposing
conditions on a licensee is typically done through the license
amendment process and not through the exemption process; therefore, the
NRC disagrees that it should have also evaluated as a reasonable
alternative granting conditional approval of the exemption request.
Petitioners comment 2. The publication of the EA after the relevant
decision has already been made does not comply with NEPA's requirement
that the analysis occur before a decision is made. The NRC approved the
exemption request on June 23, 2015, but published the draft EA and
FONSI for comment on March 8, 2017. The NRC staff relies on the
Decommissioning Financial Status Report from March 30, 2015 to support
the EA, when it had a more recent report from March 30, 2016.
NRC response. The NRC disagrees with this comment. In CLI-16-17,
the Commission directed the NRC staff ``to conduct an environmental
assessment to examine the environmental impacts, if any, associated
with the exemption.'' Although the Commission declined to reverse the
staff's approval of the exemption request, it specified that if the
staff's environmental review ``results in a determination of
significant impacts, the Staff should promptly notify [the Commission]
and, at that time, [the Commission] may reconsider whether the
exemption should be stayed or vacated.''
The March 30, 2015 Decommissioning Financial Status Report (ADAMS
Accession No. ML15092A141) was not needed to support the EA and neither
was the more recent report from March 30, 2016 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML16090A355). The supporting analysis of the adequacy of the Trust to
provide reasonable assurance of adequate funding to complete all NRC
required decommissioning activities and to conduct irradiated fuel
management is described in the June 23, 2015 Federal Register Notice of
the issuance of the exemptions.
III. Finding of No Significant Impact
Entergy proposed exemptions from 10 CFR 50.82(a)(8)(i)(A) and
50.75(h)(1)(iv) to allow the licensee to use funds from the Trust for
irradiated fuel management activities. The NRC granted the exemptions
on June 23, 2015.
Consistent with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC conducted the EA for the
exemptions included in Section II of this document and incorporated by
reference into this finding. On the basis of this EA, the NRC concludes
that the exemptions did not, and will not, have a significant effect on
the quality of the human environment. Accordingly, the NRC has
determined not to prepare an EIS for the action.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 19th day of December 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Bruce Watson,
Chief, Reactor Decommissioning Branch, Division of Decommissioning,
Uranium Recovery and Waste Programs, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2017-27682 Filed 12-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P