Environmental statements; availability, etc.: Niagara Mohawk Power Corp.,

[Federal Register: September 23, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 184)]

[Notices]

[Page 50931-50932]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr23se98-109]

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket Nos. 50-220 and 50-410]

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2; Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) is considering the issuance of an Order approving, under 10 CFR 50.80, an application regarding an indirect transfer of control of the operating licenses for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 (NMP1 and NMP2, or collectively, the facility) to the extent held by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (NMPC). The transfer would be to a New York corporation, Niagara Mohawk Holdings, Inc., to be created as a holding company over NMPC in accordance with a Settlement Agreement reached with the New York Public Service Commission (PSC Case Nos. 94-E-0098 and 94-E-0099), dated October 10, 1997, and revised March 19, 1998. NMPC is licensed by the Commission to possess, maintain, and operate both NMP1 and NMP2. NMPC fully owns NMP1 and is a 41-percent co-owner of NMP2. The facility is located in Scriba, New York.

Environmental Assessment

Identification of the Proposed Action:

The proposed action would consent to the indirect transfer of control of the licenses to the extent effected by NMPC becoming a subsidiary of the newly formed holding company in connection with a proposed plan of restructuring. Under the restructuring plan, each share of NMPC's common stock would be exchanged for one new share of common stock of the holding company. NMPC's outstanding preferred stock would not be exchanged. Under this restructuring, NMPC would divest all of its hydro and fossil generation assets by auction, but would retain its nuclear assets, and would continue to be an ``electric utility'' as defined in 10 CFR 50.2 engaged in the transmission, distribution and, through NMP1 and NMP2, the generation of electricity. NMPC would continue to be the owner of NMP1 and a co-owner of NMP2 and would continue to operate both NMP1 and NMP2. No direct transfer of the operating licenses or ownership interests in the facility would result from the proposed restructuring. The transaction would not involve any change in the responsibility for nuclear operations within NMPC. Officer responsibilities at the holding company level would be primarily administrative and financial in nature and would not involve operational matters related to NMP1 or NMP2. No NMPC nuclear management positions would be changed as a result of the corporate restructuring. The proposed action is in accordance with NMPC's application submitted under a cover letter dated July 21, 1998.

The Need for the Proposed Action:

The proposed action is required to enable NMPC to restructure as described above.

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Action:

The Commission has completed its evaluation of the proposed corporate restructuring and concludes that it is an administrative action unrelated to plant operation; therefore, there will be no resulting physical or operational changes to the facility. The corporate restructuring will not affect the qualifications or organizational affiliation of the personnel who operate and maintain the facility.

The proposed action will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in occupational or offsite radiation exposure. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant radiological environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

With regard to potential nonradiological impacts, the restructuring will not affect nonradiological plant effluents and will have no other nonradiological environmental impact.

Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action:

Since the Commission has concluded there are no significant environmental impacts that will result from the proposed action, any alternatives with equal or greater environmental impact need not be evaluated.

[[Page 50932]]

As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the application would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmental impacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are similar.

Alternative Use of Resources:

This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statements Related to the Operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 1 dated January 1974 (39 Federal Register 3309, dated January 25, 1974), or in the Final Environmental Statements Related to the Operation of Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No. 2, (NUREG-1085) dated May 1985.

Agencies and Persons Contacted:

In accordance with its stated policy, on September 10, 1998, the staff consulted with the New York State official, Mr. Jack Spath, regarding the environmental impact of the proposed action. The State official had no comments.

Finding of No Significant Impact

Based upon the environmental assessment, 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 NMPC's application dated July 21, 1998, which is available for public inspection at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the local public document room located at the Reference and Documents Department, Penfield Library, State University of New York, Oswego, New York 13126.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day of September 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. S. Singh Bajwa, Director, Project Directorate I-1, Division of Reactor Projects--I/II, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98-25415Filed9-22-98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590-01-P