Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Notices 187 

where the weather conditions change 

rapidly and dramatically. Vessels 

working in these high latitudes are 

subject to demanding and often 

dangerous conditions due to low 

temperatures, high winds, and rough 

seas. Failure to meet any of the 

technical requirements would have 

severe negative consequences for the 

project with regard to operational safety. 

The market research for this 

exemption was done by the shipyard in 

the summer of 2010 and verified by the 

UAF project team in July 2010. As noted 

in UAF’s request for this exemption, the 

shipyard performed market research by 

reviewing industry publications, the 

Internet (including the Marine 

Electronics Journal Web site) and 

contacting various electronic supply 

companies in order to assess whether 

there exists a domestic capability to 

provide a weather fax that meets the 

necessary requirements for safe and 

successful operation world-wide. 

Eighteen (18) potential vendors were 

identified with only six (6) 

manufacturing a weather fax. Of the six, 

only one (1) was a U.S. manufacturer. 

The shipyard then compared the 

existing product lines for compliance 

with the weather fax technical 

specifications and requirements as 

identified above. It was found that the 

one U.S. manufacturer did not make a 

unit that was stand-alone. Instead, the 

system uses a personal computer to 

provide both the human interface and 

printing capability of the weather 

charts. This requires the bridge watch to 

actively manage and interface with the 

system, which takes their attention from 

other navigational and operational 

duties. This distraction increases the 

likelihood of collision, grounding, 

failure to adequately monitor over-theside science operations, and 

inadvertently sailing into dangerous 

weather conditions. Because of this, all 

modern ocean-going vessels have at 

least one stand-alone weather fax 

system. 

The project’s conclusion is there are 

no U.S. manufacturers who produce a 

suitable weather fax unit that meets all 

of the ARRV requirements so an 

exemption to the Buy American 

requirements is necessary. 

In the absence of a domestic supplier 

that could provide a requirementscompliant weather fax, UAF requested 

that NSF issue a Section 1605 

exemption determination with respect 

to the purchase of a foreign-supplied, 

requirements-compliant weather fax, so 

that the vessel will meet the specific 

design and technical requirements 

which, as explained above, are 

necessary for this vessel to be able to 

perform its mission safely and 

successfully. Furthermore, the 

shipyard’s market research as verified 

by UAF indicated that a weather fax 

compliant with the ARRV’s technical 

specifications and requirements is 

commercially available from foreign 

vendors within their standard product 

lines. 

NSF’s Division of Acquisition and 

Cooperative Support (DACS) and other 

NSF program staff reviewed the UAF 

exemption request submittal, found that 

it was complete, and determined that 

sufficient technical information was 

provided in order for NSF to evaluate 

the exemption request and to conclude 

that an exemption is needed and should 

be granted. 

III. Exemption 

On October 22, 2010, based on the 

finding that no domestically produced 

weather fax met all of the ARRV’s 

technical specifications and 

requirements and pursuant to section 

1605(b), the NSF Chief Financial 

Officer, in accordance with a delegation 

order from the Director of the agency, 

granted a limited project exemption of 

the Recovery Act’s Buy American 

requirements with respect to the 

procurement of the marine weather fax. 

Dated: December 23, 2010. 

Lawrence Rudolph, 

General Counsel. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33044 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7555–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

Programmatic Environmental 

Assessment and Final Finding of No 

Significant Impact for Exemptions 

From the Implementation Deadline for 

New Security Requirements 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) has received and 

expects to receive exemption requests 

from several nuclear power reactor 

licensees. Each expected exemption 

request will be from the implementation 

date requirement of Title 10 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 73.55. 

The NRC is authorized to issue 

exemptions pursuant to 10 CFR 73.5. In 

accordance with 10 CFR 51.21, the NRC 

has performed a programmatic 

environmental assessment of these 

exemption requests. The NRC 

concluded that the proposed action 

constitutes administrative (timing) 

changes that would not impact the 

environmental resources near any 

specified nuclear power plant. Based 

upon the results of this programmatic 

environmental assessment, the NRC is 

issuing a finding of no significant 

impact. 

Environmental Assessment 

Identification of the Proposed Action 

The proposed action may include 

issuing exemptions to nuclear power 

plant licensees for up to 40 nuclear 

power plant sites, all of which have 

already been granted plant-specific 

exemptions granting additional time to 

implement some of the new 

requirements of 10 CFR 73.55. These 

sites are: 

Arkansas Nuclear One, Units 1 and 2 

Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 

and 2 

Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 

and 3 

Brunswick Steam Electric Station, Units 1 

and 2 

Columbia Generating Station 

Cooper Nuclear Station 

Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant 

Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 

No. 1 

Diablo Canyon Power Plant, Unit Nos. 1 

and 2 

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 

Fermi 2 

Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1 

Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 

H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 

No. 2 

Hope Creek Generating Station, Unit Nos. 1 

and 2 

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit Nos. 1, 

2 and 3 

James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant 

Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 

and 2 

Millstone Power Station, Unit Nos. 1, 2, 

and 3 

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant 

North Anna Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 

and 2 

Palisades Nuclear Plant 

Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 

1, 2, and 3 

Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit No. 1 

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station 

Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 

Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, 

Units 1 and 2 

Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. 

1 and 2 

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 

2 and 3 

Seabrook Station, Unit No. 1 

Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 

Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 

South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 

Surry Power Station, Unit Nos. 1 and 2 

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 

and 2 

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station 

Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 

No. 1 

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 

and 2 

Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 

Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
188 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Notices 

Wolf Creek Generating Station 

Specifically, the licensees for each of 

these plants may propose an additional 

alternate date for full compliance 

beyond the March 31, 2010 date 

required by 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1), and if 

approved by the NRC, would be granted 

a plant-specific exemption. The 

proposed action, an exemption 

extending the schedule for completion 

of actions required by the revised 10 

CFR 73.55, would not involve any 

physical changes to the reactor(s), fuel, 

plant structures, support structures, 

land, or water at each nuclear power 

plant site. If granted, a plant-specific 

safety evaluation will be included in the 

letter to the licensee approving the 

exemption from the regulation. 

The Need for the Proposed Action 

The proposed action is needed to 

continue to exempt up to 40 nuclear 

power plant sites from being in full 

compliance with new requirements 

contained in 10 CFR 73.55. The original 

implementation date was March 31, 

2010 and previous exemptions were 

granted to several licensees from 

meeting that date. Another round of 

exemptions is needed to provide these 

licensees with additional time to 

comply with the rule requirements. 

While licensees completed much of the 

work required by the 10 CFR 73.55 rule 

change at their plants by the March 31, 

2010 implementation date, affected 

licensees require additional time to 

complete all newly required 

modifications. 

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed 

Action 

The NRC regulation, 10 CFR 73.55, 

requires NRC nuclear power plant 

licensees to implement various physical 

protection requirements to prevent 

radiological sabotage. The NRC has 

completed its environmental assessment 

of the proposed action, and has 

concluded that, should NRC decide to 

grant a 10 CFR 73.55 compliance date 

exemption to these plants, extending the 

implementation deadline would not 

significantly affect plant safety and 

would not significantly affect the 

probability of an accident. 

The proposed action would not 

increase the radiological hazard beyond 

what was analyzed in the environmental 

assessment and finding of no significant 

impact made by the Commission in 

promulgating its revisions to 10 CFR 

73.55 as discussed in the Federal 

Register notice dated March 27, 2009 

(74 FR 13926). There would be no 

change to radioactive effluents and 

emissions that would increase radiation 

exposures to plant workers and 

members of the public. Therefore, no 

radiological impacts are expected as a 

result of the proposed action. 

In addition, there will be no 

construction or major renovation of any 

buildings or structures, nor any ground 

disturbing activities associated with an 

extension of the compliance deadline. 

Licensees would not increase or 

decrease their workforce, nor is traffic to 

or around any of the subject power 

plants expected to increase, as a result 

of an extension of the compliance 

deadline. Therefore, providing licensees 

with additional time to comply with the 

revised requirements of 10 CFR 73.55 

would not alter land use, air quality, 

and water use (quality and quantity) 

conditions or National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System permits 

at each of the nuclear power plants that 

may be the subject of an exemption 

request. Aquatic and terrestrial habitat 

in the vicinity of each power plant; 

threatened, endangered, and protected 

species under the Endangered Species 

Act; and essential fish habitat covered 

by the Magnuson-Stevens Act would not 

be affected. In addition, historic and 

cultural resources, socioeconomic 

conditions, and minority and lowincome populations in the vicinity of 

each power plant would also not be 

affected by this action. 

As previously noted, in promulgating 

its amendments to 10 CFR part 73, the 

Commission prepared an environmental 

assessment of the rule change and 

published a finding of no significant 

impact (10 CFR parts 50, 52, 72, and 73, 

Power Reactor Security Requirements, 

74 FR 13926 (March 27, 2009)). Thus, 

through the proposed action, the 

Commission would be granting 

additional time for the licensees to 

comply with regulatory requirements for 

which the Commission has already 

found no significant impact. 

For the foregoing reasons, the NRC 

concludes that there would be no 

significant radiological or nonradiological environmental impacts 

associated with the extension of the 

implementation date of the new 

requirements of 10 CFR 73.55. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

As an alternative to the proposed 

action, the NRC considered denial of the 

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

alternative). Denial of the exemption 

requests would result in no change in 

current environmental conditions at 

each of the nuclear power plants. 

Denial of the exemption requests 

would result in the licensees being in 

non-compliance with 10 CFR 73.55(a)(1) 

and thus, subject to NRC enforcement 

action. The end result, however, would 

still be ultimate licensee compliance 

with the requirements of 10 CFR 73.55, 

but with the added expense to both the 

NRC and the licensees of any 

enforcement actions. The NRC 

concludes that the environmental 

impacts of the proposed exemption and 

the ‘‘no action’’ alternative are similar. 

Alternative Use of Resources 

The proposed action does not involve 

the use of any different resources than 

those considered in the final 

environmental statements for the 

granting of the operating licenses for 

these nuclear power plants and for those 

plants that have had their licenses 

renewed, in NUREG–1437, ‘‘Generic 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

License Renewal of Nuclear Plants,’’ 

published in May 1996, and its 

supplements published from 1999 to the 

present. 

Finding of No Significant Impact 

On the basis of the above 

environmental assessment, which in 

accordance with 10 CFR 51.32(a)(4), is 

incorporated into this finding of no 

significant impact by reference, the NRC 

concludes that the proposed action 

constitutes an administrative change 

(timing) that would 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. 

Further details with respect to the 

proposed action will be available as 

individual licensees request 

exemptions. Portions of these requests 

may contain proprietary and safeguards 

information and, accordingly, will not 

available to the public. Other parts of 

these documents may be examined, 

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

Public Document Room (PDR), located 

at One White Flint North, Public File 

Area O–1 F21, 11555 Rockville Pike 

(first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852. 

Publicly available records will be 

accessible electronically from the 

Agencywide Document Access and 

Management System (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 or 301–415–4737, or send an 

e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 20th day 

of December 2010. 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 1 / Monday, January 3, 2011 / Notices 189 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Robert J. Pascarelli, 

Chief, Plant Licensing Branch III–1, Division 

of Operating Reactor Licensing, Office of 

Nuclear Reactor Regulation. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33073 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2010–0265] 

Final Regulatory Guide: Issuance, 

Availability 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Notice of Issuance and 

Availability of Regulatory Guide 3.71, 

Revision 2, ‘‘Nuclear Criticality Safety 

Standards for Fuels and Material 

Facilities.’’ 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Tamara D. Powell, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–492– 

3211 or e-mail: Tamara.Powell@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is issuing a revision 

to an existing guide in the agency’s 

‘‘Regulatory Guide’’ series. This series 

was developed to describe and make 

available to the public information such 

as methods that are acceptable to the 

NRC staff for implementing specific 

parts of the agency’s regulations, 

techniques that the staff uses in 

evaluating specific problems or 

postulated accidents, and data that the 

staff needs in its review of applications 

for permits and licenses. 

Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 3.71, 

entitled, ‘‘Nuclear Criticality Safety 

Standards for Fuels and Material 

Facilities,’’ was issued with a temporary 

identification as Draft Regulatory Guide, 

DG–3030. Regulatory Guide 3.71 

provides applicants, licensees, and 

certificate holders with updated 

guidance concerning criticality safety 

standards that the NRC has endorsed for 

use with nuclear fuels and material 

facilities. As such, Regulatory Guide 

3.71 describes methods that the NRC 

staff considers acceptable for complying 

with the NRC’s regulations in Title 10, 

of the Code of Federal Regulations, parts 

70, ‘‘Domestic Licensing of Special 

Nuclear Material,’’ and 76, ‘‘Certification 

of Gaseous Diffusion Plants’’ (10 CFR 

parts 70 and 76). 

The NRC staff has revised Regulatory 

Guide 3.71 to provide guidance on 

complying with these portions of the 

NRC’s regulations. This guide describes 

procedures for preventing nuclear 

criticality accidents in operations that 

involve handling, processing, storing, 

and/or transporting special nuclear 

material at fuel and material facilities. It 

also endorses specific nuclear criticality 

safety standards developed by the 

American Nuclear Society’s Standards 

Subcommittee 8 (ANS–8), ‘‘Operations 

with Fissionable Materials Outside 

Reactors.’’ Regulatory Guide 3.71 is not 

intended for use by nuclear reactor 

licensees. 

II. Further Information 

In July 2010, DG–3030 was published 

with a public comment period of 60 

days from the issuance of the guide. The 

public comment period closed on 

September 29, 2010. The staff’s 

responses to the public comments 

received are located in the NRC’s 

Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System under Accession 

Number ML103210349. Electronic 

copies of Regulatory guide 3.71, 

Revision 2 are available through the 

NRC’s public Web site under 

‘‘Regulatory Guides’’ at http:// 

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

In addition, regulatory guides are 

available for inspection at the NRC’s 

Public Document Room (PDR) located at 

Room O–1F 21, One White Flint North, 

11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland 20852–2738. The PDR’s 

mailing address is USNRC PDR, 

Washington, DC 20555–0001. The PDR 

can also be reached by telephone: 301– 

415–4737 or 800–397–4209, by fax: 

301–415–3548, and by e-mail: 

pdr@nrc.gov. 

Regulatory guides are not 

copyrighted, and Commission approval 

is not required to reproduce them. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 23rd day 

of December 2010. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

John N. Ridgely, 

Acting Chief, Regulatory Guide Development 

Branch, Division of Engineering, Office of 

Nuclear Regulatory Research. 

[FR Doc. 2010–33072 Filed 12–30–10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2009–0444] 

Notice of Availability of the Models for 

Plant-Specific Adoption of Technical 

Specifications Task Force Traveler 

TSTF–513, Revision 3, ‘‘Revise PWR 

Operability Requirements and Actions 

for RCS Leakage Instrumentation’’ 

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC). 

ACTION: Notice of Availability. 

SUMMARY: As part of the consolidated 

line item improvement process (CLIIP), 

the NRC is announcing the availability 

of the model application (with model no 

significant hazards consideration 

determination) and model safety 

evaluation (SE) for the plant-specific 

adoption of Technical Specifications 

Task Force (TSTF) Traveler TSTF–513, 

Revision 3, ‘‘Revise PWR [pressurized 

water reactor] Operability Requirements 

and Actions for RCS [reactor coolant 

system] Leakage Instrumentation.’’ 

TSTF–513, Revision 3, is available in 

the Agencywide Documents Access and 

Management System (ADAMS) under 

Accession Number ML102360355. The 

proposed changes would revise the 

Standard Technical Specifications (STS) 

to define a new time limit for restoring 

inoperable RCS leakage detection 

instrumentation to operable status and 

establish alternate methods of 

monitoring RCS leakage when one or 

more required monitors are inoperable. 

Changes to the Technical Specifications 

(TS) Bases are included, which reflect 

the proposed changes and more 

accurately reflect the contents of the 

facility design bases related to the 

operability of the RCS leakage detection 

instrumentation. The CLIIP model SE 

will facilitate expedited approval of 

plant-specific adoption of TSTF–513, 

Revision 3. 

Documents: You can access publicly 

available documents related to this 

notice using the following methods: 

NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR): 

The public may examine and have 

copied for a fee publicly available 

documents at the NRC’s PDR, Public 

File Area O1 F21, One White Flint 

North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, 

Maryland. 

NRC’s Agencywide Documents Access 

and Management System (ADAMS): 

Publicly available documents created or 

received at the NRC are available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/ 

reading-rm/adams.html. From this page, 

the public can gain entry into ADAMS, 

which provides text and image files of 


jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with NOTICES