59278 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 191 / Monday, October 4, 2004 / Notices 

Dated: September 28, 2004. 

Susanne E. Bolton, 

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 04–22223 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket No. 030–29418] 

University of Pittsburgh Environmental 

Assessment and Final Finding of No 

Significant Impact for Exemption From 

10 CFR 35.615(F)(3) 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is authorizing the 

University of Pittsburgh, License No. 

37–00245–09, an exemption to 10 CFR 

35.615(f)(3), to permit the licensee to 

have a qualified neurosurgeon 

physically present in place of an 

Authorized User (AU) during the use of 

its gamma stereotactic radiosurgery 

(GSR) units. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The University of Pittsburgh has a 

NRC license (License No. 37–00245–09) 

which authorizes the medical use of 

three GSR units. The licensee has 

requested, in a letter dated April 9, 

2004, that NRC grant a exemption to 10 

CFR 35.615(f)(3), which requires an AU 

and Authorized Medical Physicist 

(AMP) to be physically present 

throughout all patients treatments with 

a GSR unit. 

Need for the Proposed Action 

The licensee has three GSR units 

located in the same wing of the hospital. 

Because of its expanding patient 

workload, the licensee states that there 

will be times when it will need to be 

able to perform simultaneous treatments 

with the GSR units. The licensee is 

requesting an exemption to 10 CFR 

35.615(f)(3) to allow the use of a 

qualified neurosurgeon, instead of an 

AU, to be present throughout patients 

treatments involving the GSR units, in 

addition to the presence of the AMP. 

The AU will be immediately available to 

respond to an emergency at any of the 

units. 

The exemption is needed so that 

University of Pittsburgh can continue to 

provide optimum medical treatment to 

its patients. The exemption would allow 

the University of Pittsburgh to perform 

simultaneous treatments with the GSR 

units. The exemption would allow 

better participation of the AU in dose 

treatment planning and patient set-up, 

without requiring the addition of a 

second AU. In evaluating the licensee’s 

performance conforming to the current 

requirements in 10 CFR 35.615(f)(3), 

NRC inspections since April 2000 have 

not identified any violations nor 

medical events associated with the use 

of the GSR units. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The gamma stereotactic radiosurgery 

sources are sealed sources and no 

material will be released to the 

environment. All the sources are 

contained within the unit, as verified by 

periodic spot checks performed by the 

licensee. The proposed action does not 

increase public radiation exposure. 

There will be no impact on the 

environment as a result of the proposed 

action. 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

As required by Section 102(2)(E) of 

NEPA (42 USC 4322(2)(E)), a possible 

alternative to the final action has been 

considered. The alternative is to deny 

the exemption request, which would 

require the licensee to have at least two 

AUs and two AMPs physically present 

when simultaneous treatments are 

conducted at the licensed facility, 

which would significantly increase the 

cost of patient care. The alternative 

option would not produce a gain in 

protecting the human environment, and 

it would negatively impact the 

licensee’s provision of medical care to it 

patients. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

No alternative use of resources was 

considered because of the reasons stated 

above. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

The Advisory Committee on the 

Medical Uses of Isotopes (ACMUI) has 

been consulted to evaluate this 

exemption request. ACMUI’s 

recommendation has been considered in 

responding to the licensee’s request. 

Identification of Source Used 

Letters from the University of 

Pittsburgh, to NRC, Region I, dated 

April 9, 2004, and June 3, 2004. 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

Based on the above environmental 

assesment, the Commission has 

concluded that the proposed action will 

not have a significant effect on the 

quality of the human environment. 

Accordingly, NRC has determined that a 

Finding of No Significant Impact is 

appropriate and preparation of an 

environmental impact statement is not 

warranted. 

The licensee’s letters are available for 

inspection, and/or copying for a fee, in 

the NRC Region I, Public Document 

Room, 475 Allendale Road, King of 

Prussia, PA 19406. The documents are 

available electronically for public 

inspection from the Publicly Available 

Records (PARS) component of NRC’s 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS), accession numbers 

ML041190282 and ML041620397, 

respectively. ADAMS is accessible from 

the NRC Web site at: http://

www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day 

of September, 2004. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commissinon. 

Sandra Wastler, 

Section Chief, Material Safety and Inspection 

Branch, Division of Industrial and Medical 

Nuclear Safety, Office of Nuclear Material 

Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 04–22197 Filed 10–1–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission.

DATE: Week of October 4, 2004.

PLACE: Commissioner’s Conference 

Room, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland.

STATUS: Public and Closed.

ADDITIONAL MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Week of October 4, 2004

Thursday, October 7, 2004

9:25 a.m. Affirmation Session (Public 

Meeting)(Tentative) 

a. State of Alaska Department of 

Transportation and Public Facilities 

(Confirmatory Order Modifying 

License); appeals of LBP–04–16 by 

NRC Staff and Licensee (Tentative) 

b. Private Fuel Storage (Independent 

Spent Fuel Storage Installation) 

Docket No. 72–22–ISFSI (Tentative) 

c. USEC, Inc. (Tentative) 

d. Citizen’s Awareness Network’s 

(CAN) Motion to Dismiss the 

Yankee Rowe License Termination 

Proceeding or to Re-Notice It 

(Tentative) 

e. Duke Energy Corp. (Catawba 

Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2); 

Licensing Board’s certification of its 

ruling on ‘‘need to know’’ during 

discovery (Tentative) 

f. Final Rulemaking to Add New 

Section 10 CFR 50.69, ‘‘RiskInformed Categorization and 

Treatment of Structures, Systems, 

and Components for Nuclear Power