Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2004 / Notices 76483

Nontimely requests and/or petitions 

and contentions will not be entertained 

absent a determination by the 

Commission or the presiding officer of 

the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 

that the petition, request and/or the 

contentions should be granted based on 

a balancing of the factors specified in 10 

CFR 2.309(a)(1)(i)–(viii).

A request for a hearing or a petition 

for leave to intervene must be filed by: 

(1) First class mail addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary of the 

Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; (2) courier, express 

mail, and expedited delivery services: 

Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth Floor, 

One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, Maryland, 20852, 

Attention: Rulemaking and 

Adjudications Staff; (3) E-mail 

addressed to the Office of the Secretary, 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 

HEARINGDOCKET@NRC.GOV; or (4) 

facsimile transmission addressed to the 

Office of the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC, Attention: Rulemakings and 

Adjudications Staff at (301) 415–1101, 

verification number is (301) 415–1966. 

A copy of the request for hearing and 

petition for leave to intervene should 

also be sent to the Office of the General 

Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555–

0001, and it is requested that copies be 

transmitted either by means of facsimile 

transmission to 301–415–3725 or by 

email to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. A 

copy of the request for hearing and 

petition for leave to intervene should 

also be sent to Richard F. Locke, Esq., 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, P.O. 

Box 7442, San Francisco, California 

94120, the attorney for the licensee. 

The Commission hereby provides 

notice that this is a proceeding on an 

application for a license amendment 

falling within the scope of section 134 

of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 

(NWPA), 42 U.S.C. 10154. Under 

section 134 of the NWPA, the 

Commission, at the request of any party 

to the proceeding, must use hybrid 

hearing procedures with respect to ‘‘any 

matter which the Commission 

determines to be in controversy among 

the parties.’’

The hybrid procedures in section 134 

provide for oral argument on matters in 

controversy, preceded by discovery 

under the Commission’s rules and the 

designation, following argument of only 

those factual issues that involve a 

genuine and substantial dispute, 

together with any remaining questions 

of law, to be resolved in an adjudicatory 

hearing. Actual adjudicatory hearings 

are to be held on only those issues 

found to meet the criteria of section 134 

and set for hearing after oral argument. 

The Commission’s rules 

implementing section 134 of the NWPA 

are found in 10 CFR part 2, subpart K, 

‘‘Hybrid Hearing Procedures for 

Expansion of Spent Fuel Storage 

Capacity at Civilian Nuclear Power 

Reactors.’’ Under those rules, any party 

to the proceeding may invoke the hybrid 

hearing procedures by filing with the 

presiding officer a written request for 

oral argument under 10 CFR 2.1109. To 

be timely, the request must be filed 

together with a request for hearing/

petition to intervene, filed in 

accordance with 10 CFR 2.309. If it is 

determined a hearing will be held, the 

presiding officer must grant a timely 

request for oral argument. The presiding 

officer may grant an untimely request 

for oral argument only upon a showing 

of good cause by the requesting party for 

the failure to file on time and after 

providing the other parties an 

opportunity to respond to the untimely 

request. If the presiding officer grants a 

request for oral argument, any hearing 

held on the application must be 

conducted in accordance with the 

hybrid hearing procedures. In essence, 

those procedures limit the time 

available for discovery and require that 

an oral argument be held to determine 

whether any contentions must be 

resolved in an adjudicatory hearing. If 

no party to the proceeding timely 

requests oral argument, and if all 

untimely requests for oral argument are 

denied, then the usual procedures in 10 

CFR part 2, subpart L apply. 

For further details with respect to this 

action, see the application for 

amendments dated November 3, 2004, 

which is available for public inspection 

at the Commission’s PDR, located at 

One White Flint North, File Public Area 

O1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike (first 

floor), Rockville, Maryland. Publicly 

available records will be accessible from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System’s (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the Internet 

at the NRC Web site, http://

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

Persons who do not have access to 

ADAMS or who encounter problems in 

accessing the documents located in 

ADAMS, should contact the NRC PDR 

Reference staff by telephone at 1–800–

397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by e-mail 

to pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day 

of December 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Girija Shukla, 

Project Manager, Section Project Directorate 

IV, Division of Licensing Project Management, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 04–27846 Filed 12–20–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[Docket Nos. 50–315 and 50–316] 

Indiana Michigan Power Company; 

Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1 

and 2; Environmental Assessment and 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of amendments for Facility 

Operating License Nos. DPR–58 and 

DPR–74, issued to Indiana Michigan 

Power Company (the licensee) for 

operation of the Donald C. Cook Nuclear 

Plant (CNP), Units 1 and 2, located in 

Berrien County, Michigan. Pursuant to 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (10 CFR) Sections 51.21 and 

51.32, the NRC is issuing this 

environmental assessment and finding 

of no significant impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action would be a full 

conversion from the current technical 

specifications (CTS) to a set of improved 

technical specifications (ITS) based on 

NUREG–1431, ‘‘Standard Technical 

Specifications, Westinghouse Plants,’’

Revision 2, dated June 2001. The 

proposed action is in accordance with 

the licensee’s application dated April 6, 

2004, and the information provided to 

the NRC staff through the joint NRCIndiana Michigan Power Company CNP 

ITS Conversion Web page. To expedite 

its review of the application, the NRC 

staff issued its requests for additional 

information (RAIs) through the CNP ITS 

Conversion Web page and the licensee 

addressed the RAIs by providing 

responses on the Web page. Entry into 

the database is protected so that only 

the licensee and NRC reviewers can 

enter information into the database to 

add RAIs (NRC) or providing responses 

to the RAIs (licensee); however, the 

public can enter the database to read the 

questions asked and the responses 

provided. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.4 

regarding written communications for 

license amendment requests, and in 

order to have the database on the CNP, 

Units 1 and 2, dockets before the 

amendments would be issued, the 

licensee will submit a copy of the 

76484 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2004 / Notices 

database to the NRC after there are no 

further RAIs. The public can access the 

database through the NRC Web site at 

http://www.nrc.gov by the following 

process: (1) Click on the tab labeled 

‘‘Nuclear Reactors’’ on the NRC home 

page along the upper part of the web 

page, (2) then click on the link to 

‘‘Operating Reactors’’ which is under 

‘‘Regulated Activities’’ on the left hand 

side of the web page, (3) then click on 

the link to ‘‘Standard Technical 

Specifications’’ which is on right hand 

side of the page, and (4) finally click on 

the link to ‘‘Comments on the 

application and responses by D. C. 

Cook,’’ near the bottom of the web page, 

to open the database. The RAIs and 

responses to RAIs are organized by ITS 

Sections 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 3.1 through 3.9, 

4.0, and 5.0, which are listed first, and 

the beyond scope issues (BSIs) 1 

through 35, which are listed later. For 

every listed ITS section or BSI, there is 

an RAI which can be read by clicking 

on the ITS section or BSI number. The 

licensee’s responses are shown by a 

solid triangle adjacent to the ITS section 

or BSI number. To read the response, 

click on the triangle. To page down 

through the ITS sections to the BSIs, 

click on ‘‘next’’ along the top of the page 

or on ‘‘previous’’ to return to the 

previous page. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The Commission’s ‘‘Proposed Policy 

Statement on Technical Specifications 

Improvements for Nuclear Power 

Reactors’’ (52 FR 3788), dated February 

6, 1987, contained an Interim Policy 

Statement that set forth objective criteria 

for determining which regulatory 

requirements and operating restrictions 

should be included in the technical 

specifications (TS). When it issued the 

Interim Policy Statement, the 

Commission also requested comments 

on it. Subsequently, to implement the 

Interim Policy Statement, each reactor 

vendor owners group and the NRC staff 

began developing standard TS (STS) for 

reactors supplied by each vendor. The 

Commission then published its ‘‘Final 

Policy Statement on Technical 

Specifications Improvements for 

Nuclear Power Reactors’’ (58 FR 39132), 

dated July 22, 1993, in which it 

addressed comments received on the 

Interim Policy Statement, and 

incorporated experience in developing 

the STS. The Final Policy Statement 

formed the basis for a revision to 10 CFR 

50.36 (60 FR 36953), dated July 19, 

1995, that codified the criteria for 

determining the content of TS. The NRC 

Committee to Review Generic 

Requirements reviewed the STS, made 

note of their safety merits, and indicated 

its support of conversion by operating 

plants to the STS. For CNP, Units 1 and 

2, NUREG–1431 documents the STS and 

forms the basis for the CNP, Units 1 and 

2, conversion to the ITS. 

The proposed changes to the CTS are 

based on NUREG–1431 and the 

guidance provided in the Final Policy 

Statement. The objective of this action 

is to rewrite, reformat, and streamline 

the CTS (i.e., to convert the CTS to the 

ITS). Emphasis was placed on human 

factors principles to improve clarity and 

understanding. The ITS Bases section 

has been significantly expanded to 

clarify and better explain the purpose 

and foundation of each specification. In 

addition to NUREG–1431, portions of 

the CTS were also used as the basis for 

the development of the CNP, Units 1 

and 2, ITS. The NRC staff discussed 

plant-specific issues (i.e., unique design 

features, requirements, and operating 

practices) with the licensee. 

Relocated specifications include those 

changes to the CTS that relocate certain 

requirements which do not meet the 10 

CFR 50.36 selection criteria. These 

requirements may be relocated to the 

Bases section, updated safety analysis 

report, core operating limits report, 

operational quality assurance plan, 

plant procedures, or other licenseecontrolled documents. Relocating 

requirements to licensee-controlled 

documents does not eliminate them, but 

rather, places them under more 

appropriate regulatory controls (i.e., 10 

CFR 50.54(a)(3), and 10 CFR 50.59) to 

manage their implementation and future 

changes. 

The proposed action is necessary to 

allow the licensee to implement the ITS. 

The ITS are based on standard 

Westinghouse Technical Specifications 

and have been implemented by several 

utilities. They are considered an 

improvement over the CTS. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC staff has completed its 

evaluation of the proposed action and 

concludes that the proposed TS 

conversion would not increase the 

probability or consequences of accidents 

previously analyzed and would not 

affect facility radiation levels or facility 

radiological effluents. Specifically, the 

proposed TS changes will not increase 

the probability or consequences of 

accidents. No changes are being made in 

the types or amounts of any effluent that 

may be released offsite, and there is no 

significant increase in the allowable 

individual or cumulative occupational 

radiation exposure. Therefore, there are 

no significant radiological 

environmental impacts associated with 

the proposed action. 

With regard to potential 

nonradiological impacts, the proposed 

action does not have a potential to affect 

any historic sites because no previously 

undisturbed area will be affected by the 

proposed TS changes. It does not affect 

nonradiological plant effluents and has 

no other environmental impact. 

Therefore, there are no significant 

nonradiological environmental impacts 

associated with the proposed action. 

Accordingly, the NRC concludes that 

there are no significant environmental 

impacts associated with the proposed 

action and, thus, the proposed action 

will not have any significant impact to 

the human environment. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

As an alternative to the proposed 

action, the staff considered denial of the 

proposed action (i.e., the ‘‘no-action’’

alternative). 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 

The action does not involve the use of 

any different resources than those 

previously considered in the Final 

Environmental Statement for the CNP, 

Units 1 and 2, dated August 1973. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

On November 19, 2004, the staff 

consulted with Mr. Ken Yale of the 

Michigan Department of Environmental 

Quality regarding the environmental 

impact of the proposed action. The State 

official agreed with the conclusions of 

the NRC. 

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 action. 

For further details with respect to the 

proposed action, see the licensee’s letter 

dated April 6, 2004, and the information 

provided to the NRC staff through the 

joint NRC-Indiana Michigan Power 

Company CNP ITS Conversion web 

page. Documents may be examined, 

and/or copied for a fee, at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room (PDR), located 

at One White Flint North, 11555 

Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, 

Maryland. Publicly available records 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 244 / Tuesday, December 21, 2004 / Notices 76485

will be accessible electronically from 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) Public 

Electronic Reading Room on the internet 

at the NRC Web site, http://

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

’’adams.html’’. (Note: Public access to 

ADAMS has been temporarily 

suspended so that security reviews of 

publicly available documents may be 

performed and potentially sensitive 

information removed. Please check the 

NRC Web site for updates on the 

resumption of ADAMS access.) Persons 

who do not have access to ADAMS or 

who encounter problems in accessing 

the documents located in ADAMS, 

should contact the NRC PDR Reference 

staff by telephone at 1–800–397–4209 or 

301–415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr@nrc.gov.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 14th day 

of December 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Margie Kotzalas, 

Acting Chief, Section 1, Project Directorate 

III, Division of Licensing Project Management, 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 04–27845 Filed 12–20–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Extension of Public Comment Period: 

Louisiana Energy Services National 

Enrichment Facility

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC).

ACTION: Extension of public comment 

period. 

SUMMARY: The NRC is extending further 

the public comment period for the Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) 

for the Proposed National Enrichment 

Facility (NEF) in Lea County, New 

Mexico (NUREG–1790). The notice of 

availability of the DEIS appeared in the 

Federal Register on September 17, 2004 

(69 FR 56104), with the public comment 

period to end on November 6, 2004. On 

November 9, 2004, the NRC extended 

the public comment period until 

December 18, 2004 (69 FR 64983). 

On October 25, 2004, the NRC 

suspended public access to its 

Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) database 

accessible through the NRC’s Web site 

and initiated an additional security 

review of publicly-available documents 

to ensure that potentially sensitive 

information is removed. This security 

review is ongoing and the exact date of 

its completion is not certain. 

However, from October 25, 2004, until 

December 6, 2004, members of the 

public continued to have access to the 

DEIS through NRC’s project-specific 

Web site (http://www.nrc.gov/materials/

fuel-cycle-fac/lesfacility.html). Members 

of the public also had access to the 

Environmental Report (ER) submitted by 

Louisiana Energy Services (LES) for the 

NEF through the same Web site until 

November 28, 2004. The links to the 

DEIS and the ER were suspended on 

December 7, 2004, and on November 29, 

2004, respectively, while the NRC staff 

conducted its security review of these 

documents. 

By this notice, the public comment 

period on the DEIS is being extended 

further until January 7, 2005. This 

extension of the public comment period 

will allow members of the public an 

additional opportunity to obtain 

relevant documents in order to 

comment on the DEIS. The NRC staff 

will make available on its projectspecific Web site redacted copies of the 

DEIS, the ER, and LES’s responses to 

NRC staff requests for additional 

information related to the ER. Redacted 

versions of these documents are 

expected to be accessible beginning on 

December 23, 2004. Interested members 

of the public may obtain copies of 

additional publicly-available documents 

for review and/or copying by contacting 

the NRC Public Document Room. The 

NRC Public Document Room is located 

at NRC Headquarters in Rockville, MD, 

and can be contacted at 800–397–4209 

or 301–415–4737 or pdr@nrc.gov.

Members of the public are invited and 

encouraged to submit comments to the 

Chief, Rules Review and Directives 

Branch, Mail Stop T6–D59, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001. Please note Docket No. 

70–3103 when submitting comments. 

Written comments submitted by mail 

should be postmarked by January 7, 

2005, to ensure consideration. 

Comments mailed after that date will be 

considered to the extent practical. 

Comments will also be accepted by email to nrcrep@nrc.gov, or by facsimile 

to 301–415–5397, Attention: Anna 

Bradford.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

general or technical information 

associated with the license review of the 

National Enrichment Facility, please 

contact Timothy Johnson at (301) 415–

7299. For general information on the 

NRC environmental review process, 

please contact either Anna Bradford at 

(301) 415–5228 or James Park at (301) 

415–5835.

Dated at Rockville, MD, this 15th day of 

December 2004.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

B. Jennifer Davis, 

Chief, Environmental and Low-Level Waste 

Section, Division of Waste Management and 

Environmental Protection, Office of Nuclear 

Material Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 04–27847 Filed 12–20–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Advisory Committee on Reactor 

Safeguards Subcommittee Meeting on 

Thermal-Hydraulic Phenomena; Notice 

of Meeting 

The ACRS Subcommittee on ThermalHydraulic Phenomena will hold a 

meeting on January 26, 2005, Room T–

2B3, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland. 

The agenda for the subject meeting 

shall be as follows: 

Wednesday, January 26, 2005—8:30 

a.m. until the conclusion of business.

The Subcommittee will review the 

application for an 8.5% power uprate 

for the Waterford Nuclear Power 

Station. The Subcommittee will hear 

presentations by and hold discussions 

with representatives of the NRC staff 

and Entergy Nuclear South regarding 

this matter. The Subcommittee will 

gather information, analyze relevant 

issues and facts, and formulate 

proposed positions and actions, as 

appropriate, for deliberation by the full 

Committee. 

Members of the public desiring to 

provide oral statements and/or written 

comments should notify the Designated 

Federal Official, Mr. Ralph Caruso 

(Telephone: 301–415–8065) five days 

prior to the meeting, if possible, so that 

appropriate arrangements can be made. 

Electronic recordings will be permitted. 

Further information regarding this 

meeting can be obtained by contacting 

the Designated Federal Official between 

7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (e.t.). Persons 

planning to attend this meeting are 

urged to contact the above named 

individual at least two working days 

prior to the meeting to be advised of any 

potential changes to the agenda.

Dated: December 15, 2004. 

John H. Flack, 

Acting Branch Chief, ACRS/ACNW.

[FR Doc. 04–27844 Filed 12–20–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P