51622 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 7, 2009 / Notices 

have access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s 

PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 

301–415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The proposed 

draft NUREG–1924, ‘‘Electric Raceway 

Fire Barrier Systems (ERFBS) in Nuclear 

Power Plants,’’ is available 

electronically under ADAMS Accession 

Number ML092650002. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public 

comments and supporting materials 

related to this notice can be found at 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

on Docket ID: NRC–2009–0442. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Gabriel Taylor, Fire Research Branch, 

Division of Risk Analysis, Office of 

Nuclear Regulatory Research, telephone 

(301) 251–7576, e-mail 

gabriel.taylor@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 

response to the 1975 Browns Ferry fire, 

the United States Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) issued Appendix R 

to Title 10 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations part 50 (10 CFR part 50). To 

support fire protection defense-in-depth 

one- or three-hour Electric Raceway Fire 

Barrier Systems (ERFBS) were permitted 

for use as an acceptable method to 

protect electrical cables essential to fire 

protection safe shutdown capability. 

However, ERFBS were a new approach 

to fire barrier applications and as the 

initial installation of the ERFBS began, 

there was uncertainty regarding the 

ERFBS performance and definitive test 

standards for ERFBS qualification. 

Following review and research efforts, 

the NRC resolved many concerns with 

ERFBS, including the fire resistance, 

ampacity derating, and seismic position 

retention. This report documents the 

history of these barriers and how US 

NPPs use ERFBS for compliance. This 

report also documents the current state 

of the use of these barriers and evaluates 

the effectiveness of these barriers in 

achieving adequate protection for 

nuclear power plants. 

The NRC is seeking public comment 

in order to receive feedback from the 

widest range of interested parties and to 

ensure that all information relevant to 

the information contained within this 

document is correct and accurate. This 

document is issued for comment only 

and is not intended for interim use. The 

NRC will review public comments 

received on the documents, incorporate 

suggested changes as necessary, and 

make the final NUREG-report available 

to the public. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day 

of October 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Mark H. Salley, 

Chief, Fire Research Branch, Division of Risk 

Analysis, Office of Nuclear Regulatory 

Research. 

[FR Doc. E9–24211 Filed 10–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2009–0440; Docket No. 40–8989] 

Issuance of Environmental 

Assessment and Draft Finding of No 

Significant Impact for Modification of 

Exemption From Certain U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission Licensing 

Requirements for Special Nuclear 

Material for EnergySolutions LLC, 

Clive, UT 

AGENCY: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Environmental Assessment and 

Draft Finding of No Significant Impact. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) has prepared an 

Environmental Assessment for the 

issuance of an Order pursuant to 

Section 274f of the Atomic Energy Act 

that would modify an Order issued to 

EnergySolutions, LLC (EnergySolutions) 

on May 30, 2006. In accordance with 10 

CFR 51.33, the NRC has also prepared 

a draft Finding of No Significant Impact 

(FONSI) for public review and 

comment. The current action is in 

response to a request by 

EnergySolutions dated September 26, 

2006. The May 30, 2006 Order was 

published in the Federal Register on 

June 13, 2006 (71 FR 34165). The May 

30, 2006 Order, which modified a 

previous Order issued to 

EnergySolutions on July 11, 2005, 

exempted EnergySolutions from certain 

NRC regulations and permitted WCS, 

under specified conditions, to possess 

waste containing special nuclear 

material (SNM), in greater quantities 

than specified in 10 CFR Part 150, at 

EnergySolutions’s facility located in 

Clive, Utah, without obtaining an NRC 

license pursuant to 10 CFR Part 70. 

DATES: The public comment period on 

the draft FONSI closes on November 6, 

2009. Written comments should be 

submitted as described in the 

ADDRESSES section of this notice. 

Comments received after this date will 

be considered if it is practical to do so, 

but the Commission is able to assure 

consideration only for comments 

received on or before November 6, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by any one of the following methods. 

Please include Docket ID NRC–2009– 

0440 in the subject line of your 

comments. Comments submitted in 

writing or in electronic form will be 

posted on the NRC Web site and on the 

Federal rulemaking website 

Regulations.gov. Because your 

comments will not be edited to remove 

any identifying or contact information, 

the NRC cautions you against including 

any information in your submission that 

you do not want to be publicly 

disclosed. 

The NRC requests that any party 

soliciting or aggregating comments 

received from other persons for 

submission to the NRC inform those 

persons that the NRC will not edit their 

comments to remove any identifying or 

contact information, and therefore, they 

should not include any information in 

their comments that they do not want 

publicly disclosed. 

Federal Rulemaking Website: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and search 

for documents filed under Docket ID 

NRC–2009–0440. Address questions 

about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 

301–492–3668; e-mail 

Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. 

Mail comments to: Michael T. Lesar, 

Chief, Rulemaking and Directives 

Branch (RDB), Division of 

Administrative Services, Office of 

Administration, Mail Stop: TWB–05– 

B01M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission, Washington, DC 20555– 

0001, or by fax to RDB at (301) 492– 

3446. 

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 

NRC’s public documents. If you do not 

have access to ADAMS or if there are 

problems in accessing the documents 

located in ADAMS, contact the NRC’s 

PDR reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 

301–415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

Federal Rulemaking Web site: Public 

comments and supporting materials 

related to this notice can be found at 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 7, 2009 / Notices 51623 

http://www.regulations.gov by searching 

on Docket ID: NRC–2009–0440. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Nishka Devaser, Project Manager, 

Environmental and Performance 

Assessment Directorate, Division of 

Waste Management and Environmental 

Protection, Office of Federal and State 

Materials and Environmental 

Management Programs, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555. Telephone: (301) 415–5196; 

Fax number: (301) 415–5369; E-mail: 

Nishka.Devaser@nrc.gov 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction: 

EnergySolutions is authorized by 

license from the State of Utah, an NRC 

Agreement State, to operate a disposal 

facility for LLW. EnergySolutions is also 

licensed by Utah to dispose of mixed 

waste, hazardous waste, and 11(e).2 

byproduct material. 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is considering 

issuance of the fifth amendment to an 

Order that was initially issued to 

Envirocare of Utah, Inc. on May 24, 

1999 (64 FR 27826), pursuant to Section 

274f of the Atomic Energy Act. NRC 

previously amended the Order in 

January 2003 (68 FR 7400), December 

2003 (68 FR 59645), August 2005 (70 FR 

44123), and June 2006 (71 FR 34165). 

The amended Order would continue to 

grant EnergySolutions (formerly 

Envirocare of Utah, Inc.) an exemption 

from the requirements for an NRC 

license under 10 CFR Part 70. The 

amendment is required to allow 

EnergySolutions to receive steel piping 

waste containing residual special 

nuclear material (SNM). The steel 

piping waste will be generated by the 

Department of Energy as it 

decommissions the K–25 gaseous 

diffusion uranium enrichment facility in 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee. 

The 1999 Order exempted Envirocare 

(now EnergySolutions) from certain 

NRC regulations and permitted the 

company, under specified conditions, to 

possess waste containing SNM, in 

greater quantities than specified in 10 

CFR Part 150, at the Envirocare lowlevel waste (LLW) disposal facility 

located in Clive, Utah, without 

obtaining an NRC license pursuant to 10 

CFR Part 70. The 1999 Order permitted 

Envirocare to possess SNM below 

specified concentrations, without regard 

for mass. The January 2003 amendment 

to the Order addressed certain waste 

treatment processes; a change in the 

homogeneous contiguous mass limit 

from 145 kg to 600 kg; clarified certain 

language of the Order; and removed the 

confirmatory testing requirements for 

debris waste. The December 2003 

amendment to the Order: Amended 

Condition 1, to include criticality-based 

concentration limits without 

magnesium oxide; modified the units of 

the table in Condition 1 from picocuries 

of SNM per gram of waste material to 

gram of SNM per gram of waste 

material; and (3) revised the language of 

Condition 5 to be consistent with the 

revised units in the table in Condition 

1. A July 2005 amendment to the Order: 

modified the table in Condition 1 to 

include criticality-based limits for 

uranium-233 and plutonium isotopes in 

waste containing up to 20 percent of 

materials listed in Condition 2 (e.g., 

magnesium oxide); included criticalitybased limits in the table in Condition 1 

for plutonium isotopes in waste with 

unlimited materials in Condition 2, and 

in waste with unlimited quantities of 

materials in Conditions 2 and 3 (e.g., 

beryllium); provided criticality-based 

limits for uranium-235 as a function of 

enrichment in waste containing up to 20 

percent of materials listed in Condition 

2 and in waste containing none of the 

materials listed in Condition 2; and 

authorized additional mixed waste 

treatment technologies under the Order. 

The most recent amendment to the 

Order, issued in May 2006, was an 

administrative change to accommodate 

a change in the name of the company 

from Envirocare of Utah, Inc. to 

EnergySolutions LLC. 

The NRC has prepared an 

Environmental Assessment (EA) in 

accordance with the requirements of 10 

CFR Part 51. Based on the EA, the NRC 

has concluded that a Finding of No 

Significant Impact (FONSI) is 

appropriate for the proposed action, as 

modified. 

II. Environmental Assessment (EA) 

Proposed Action 

By letters dated September 26, 2006, 

December 4, 2006, July 16, 2007, 

September 13, 2007, and January 15, 

2009, EnergySolutions requested an 

amendment to its 2006 Order. 

EnergySolutions requests an amendment 

of the package mass limits contained in 

Condition 4 of the Order, and the 

addition or revision of other conditions, 

as necessary. As described in its 

September 2007 nuclear criticality 

safety evaluation, EnergySolutions 

requests these additional changes to the 

Order so that it may receive and dispose 

of Oak Ridge K–25 gaseous diffusion 

plant piping from the Department of 

Energy (DOE) in larger containers than 

would be allowable under the 2006 

Order. EnergySolutions proposes to 

receive piping waste from the 

decommissioning of the K–25 facilities 

in gondola railcars, each containing up 

to 3.6 kg (7.9 lbs) of uranium-235 in the 

form of highly water soluble uranyl 

fluoride. EnergySolutions also proposed 

that certain additional conditions be 

added to the Order for the purposes of 

criticality safety during receipt, on-site 

storage, movement, emplacement, and 

disposal of K–25 waste. Upon 

consideration of EnergySolutions’ 

request, the NRC is considering similar 

conditions to those proposed by 

EnergySolutions that restrict: the areal 

density of highly water soluble SNM in 

disposal embankments at the Clive, UT 

site; and the amount of water which 

should be present during receipt, on-site 

storage, movement, emplacement, and 

disposal of K–25 waste. 

Site and Facility Description 

The EnergySolutions LLW disposal 

facility at Clive, UT is located 128 

kilometers (80 miles) west of Salt Lake 

City, UT. The site is arid, and receives 

about 20 centimeters (8 inches) of 

precipitation annually. A description of 

the site and its history is available in the 

Utah Division of Radiation Control 

safety evaluation report for the 

EnergySolutions license renewal. 

All low-level radioactive waste 

received at the Clive facility must 

contain radioactive constituents. The 

low-level radioactive waste 

embankment is constructed from 

materials native to the site or available 

in close proximity to the site. Due to 

requirements regarding the long-term 

stability of the embankment, the 

principal design features of the 

embankment do not rely upon synthetic 

materials to provide stability and 

isolation of the wastes from the 

environment. The principal 

construction materials are the naturally 

low-permeability clay taken from 

between the ground surface and the 

unconfined aquifer and the rock riprap 

and filter material taken from pits 

located within 16 kilometers (10 miles) 

of the facility. The vertical minimum 

separation between the bottom of the 

disposed LLW and the historic high 

water table is determined as being 4 

meters (13 feet). 

After a liner is constructed over a 

specific area of the Class A LLW 

disposal embankment, at least 30 

centimeters (12 inches) of debris-free 

soil is placed on top of the liner; 

followed by another 30 centimeters (12 

inches) of waste as a protection to the 

integrity of the liner. Both of these 

layers of protective soil are compacted 

with rubber tired equipment. Thereafter, 

the area is available for placement of 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
51624 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 7, 2009 / Notices 

waste containers and materials. Waste 

that is removed from the shipping 

container is typically compacted into 61 

centimeter (24 inch) waste lifts. Waste 

that consists of debris items that do not 

have a dimension less than 25 

centimeters (10 inches) is disposed of 

using controlled low strength material 

(CLSM) in a different disposal area. 

Need for the Proposed Action 

Condition 4 of the 2006 Order limits 

the mass of highly water soluble SNM 

that may be contained in individual 

waste packages. For example, the 2006 

Order limits the amount of highly water 

soluble uranium-235 in each waste 

package to 350 grams. Relatively small 

waste packages that contain highly 

water soluble uranium compounds in 

which the uranium-235 concentration 

limits of Condition 1 are met (e.g., 6.2 

× 10¥4 gram uranium-235 per gram 

waste), would normally contain small 

mass quantities of uranium-235 such 

that the 350 gram package mass limit 

would not be exceeded. However, in 

order to cost-effectively receive and 

process large quantities of K–25 steel 

piping waste containing highly water 

soluble uranyl fluoride, EnergySolutions 

proposes to use 100-ton capacity 

gondola railcars. Therefore, even though 

the concentration of residual uranyl 

fluoride in K–25 piping waste is 

expected to remain a fraction of the 

concentration limits contained in 

Condition 1 of the 2006 Order, the 

amount of uranium-235 in each railcar 

could exceed the current package mass 

limits in Condition 4. However, 

EnergySolutions believes that it is not 

cost-effective to package K–25 waste in 

sufficiently small quantities to meet 

Condition 4 of the 2006 Order. For this 

reason, EnergySolutions requests an 

amendment to Condition 4 of the 2006 

Order in order to receive K–25 steel 

piping waste in large gondola railcars. 

In addition, EnergySolutions proposes 

additional conditions to ensure 

criticality safety of large quantities of 

steel piping waste containing highly 

water soluble uranyl fluoride during 

waste receipt, unloading, on-site 

storage, emplacement and disposal of 

the waste. 

Alternatives to the Proposed Action 

The NRC staff considered one 

alternative to the proposed action. The 

alternative to the proposed action is 

denial of the request to amend the 2006 

Order (no-action alternative). 

Affected Environment 

NRC has prepared an environmental 

impact statement (EIS) (NUREG–1476) 

for its licensing action at the 

EnergySolutions site to authorize 

disposal of 11e.(2) byproduct material. 

The affected environment is discussed 

in detail in NUREG–1476. 

Environmental Impacts of the 

Alternatives 

No Action Alternative 

For the no-action alternative, the 

environmental impacts would be the 

same as evaluated in the Environmental 

Assessments that supported the 

issuance of original Order (64 FR 26463, 

May 14, 1999) and its amendments (68 

FR 3281; January 23, 2003, 68 FR 59645; 

October 16, 2003, 70 FR 4124; July 18, 

2005). In these prior EAs, the staff 

concluded that the issuance of the Order 

would have no significant adverse 

environmental impacts. 

Proposed Action 

For the proposed action, the 

environmental impacts would be similar 

to those described in previous EAs 

noted above, with the exception of 

environmental impacts associated with: 

Receipt and unloading of 100-ton 

capacity gondola railcars containing K– 

25 piping waste, each of which contains 

residual deposits of highly water soluble 

uranyl fluoride in quantities in excess of 

the limits in Condition 4 of the 2006 

Order (i.e., up to 3.6 kilograms of 

uranium-235); and placement in 

disposal embankments of piping waste 

containing highly water soluble uranyl 

fluoride at areal densities of up to 1 

kilogram uranium-235 per square meter. 

The proposed action would not 

significantly alter land or water usage at 

the Clive facility, or result in new 

construction. Facility effluents would 

remain essentially unchanged, since this 

action would not alter the types or 

quantities of waste that EnergySolutions 

is currently authorized to receive and 

dispose of. Disposal of Class A LLW is 

currently authorized by license from the 

State of Utah, for which no significant 

changes are anticipated other than 

incorporation into the radioactive 

materials license of a revision to 

Condition 4 to impose an areal density 

limit for highly water soluble SNM, 

including requirements to minimize 

water intrusion into the waste 

containing highly water soluble forms of 

uranium during receipt, unloading, 

onsite storage and waste emplacement 

operations. 

The proposed action, which allows 

the use of large waste packages, will 

result in a reduction of the use of waste 

packaging, and thus generate less 

packaging waste. Also, fewer 

transportation consignments would be 

required to transport waste from Oak 

Ridge, TN to the Clive, UT disposal 

facility, reducing transportation-related 

impacts from what would otherwise 

occur if smaller packages were required. 

The proposed action also further 

reduces the risk of accidental nuclear 

criticality, and resulting worker and 

public radiation doses, from the 

proposed action by imposing an areal 

density limit on disposal of highly water 

soluble forms of uranium, which is not 

currently required by the 2006 Order. 

The proposed action would not 

significantly alter available disposal 

capacity at the Clive facility, or 

significantly change the performance of 

disposed waste. The radiation dose rates 

from K–25 decommissioning waste, 

which contains uranium and trace 

amounts of other radioactive material, 

are low compared to other forms of 

Class A waste, which may contain 

source, byproduct and special nuclear 

material up to the limits allowed by the 

State of Utah radioactive materials 

license. Therefore, the proposed action 

is not likely to significantly change 

worker and public doses resulting from 

waste operations. 

Preferred Alternative 

The staff has concluded in the March 

2009 safety evaluation report for this 

proposed action that the proposed 

action provides sufficient protection of 

public health and safety, and the 

environment, and is not inimical to 

common defense and security, and is 

otherwise in the public interest. 

Therefore, staff’s preferred alternative is 

to amend the 2006 Order. 

Agencies and Persons Consulted 

Officials from the State of Utah, 

Department of Environmental Quality, 

Division of Radiation Control were 

consulted about this EA for the 

proposed action and had no comments. 

Because the proposed action is not 

expected to have any impact on 

threatened or endangered species or 

historic resources, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service and State of Utah Historic 

Preservation Officer were not consulted. 

III. Draft Finding of No Significant 

Impact 

The environmental impacts of the 

proposed action have been reviewed in 

accordance with the requirements set 

forth in 10 CFR Part 51. Based upon the 

foregoing EA, the NRC finds that the 

preferred alternative of amending the 

2006 Order will not significantly impact 

the quality of the human environment. 

The NRC also concludes that the 

proposed action to grant a modification 

to EnergySolutions’ exemption from the 

requirements of 10 CFR Part 70 is, 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 7, 2009 / Notices 51625 

pursuant to 10 CFR 70.17, authorized by 

law and will not endanger life or 

property or the common defense and 

security and is otherwise in the public 

interest. On this basis of this EA, NRC 

concludes that there are no significant 

environmental impacts and the issuance 

of a modified Order does not warrant 

the preparation of an Environmental 

Impact Statement. Accordingly, the NRC 

has determined that a Finding of No 

Significant Impact is appropriate. 

Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.33(e), a final 

determination to prepare an 

environmental impact statement or a 

final FONSI for the proposed action will 

not be made until the last day of the 

public comment period has expired on 

November 6, 2009. 

IV. Further Information 

Documents related to this action, 

including the letter requesting the 

amendment and supporting 

documentation, will be available 

electronically at the NRC’s Electronic 

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

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

you can access the NRC’s Agencywide 

Documents Access and Management 

System (ADAMS), which provides text 

and image files of NRC’s public 

documents. The ADAMS accession 

numbers for the documents related to 

this notice are: 

1. September 29, 2006 authorization 

request (ML063040029). 

2. July 16, 2007 letter response to 

request for additional information 

(ML073520212). 

3. September 13, 2007 letter response 

to request for additional information 

(ML073440260). 

If you do not have access to ADAMS 

or if there are problems in accessing the 

documents located in ADAMS, contact 

the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR) 

Reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, 301– 

415–4737, or by e-mail to 

pdr.resource@nrc.gov. 

These documents may also be viewed 

electronically on the public computers 

located at the NRC’s PDR, O–1 F21, One 

White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, MD 20852. The PDR 

reproduction contractor will copy 

documents for a fee. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 29th day 

of September 2009. 

For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

Patrice M. Bubar, 

Deputy Director, Environmental Protection 

and Performance Assessment Directorate, 

Division of Waste Management and 

Environmental Protection, Office of Federal 

and State Materials and Environmental 

Management Programs. 

[FR Doc. E9–24208 Filed 10–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

NUCLEAR REGULATORY 

COMMISSION 

[NRC–2009–0443] 

Withdrawal of Regulatory Guide 7.1 

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission. 

ACTION: Withdrawal of Regulatory Guide 

7.1. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas J. Herrity, Office of Nuclear 

Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Washington, 

DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–251– 

7447 or e-mail to 

Thomas.Herrity@nrc.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Introduction 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) is withdrawing 

Regulatory Guide 7.1 (RG 7.1), 

‘‘Administrative Guide for Packaging 

and Transporting Radioactive Material.’’ 

This guide was published in June 1974 

and provided guidance on which 

packaging and labeling regulations of 

the Department of Transportation (DOT) 

apply in a given case and what must be 

done to comply with those regulations. 

The NRC is withdrawing this regulatory 

guide because it is outdated. 

Although DOT revised their 

regulations on packaging and shipment 

of radioactive material several times 

after issuance of RG 7.1, neither this RG 

nor the American National Standards 

Institute (ANSI) standard referenced in 

the RG have been revised. In addition, 

ANSI Subcommittee N14.10 withdrew 

ANSI Standard ANSI N14.10.1, 

‘‘Administrative Guide for Packaging 

and Transporting Radioactive 

Materials,’’ dated September 14, 1973. 

DOT issued generic guidance, 

‘‘Radioactive Material Regulations 

Review,’’ on their hazardous materials 

regulations in December 2008, which 

includes radioactive material 

determination and appropriate 

packaging, labeling and placarding for a 

given material. Because DOT issued 

guidance on meeting their hazardous 

materials regulations, this RG should be 

withdrawn instead of updated. 

II. Further Information 

The withdrawal of RG 7.1 does not 

alter any prior or existing licensing 

commitments based on its use. The 

guidance provided in this RG is neither 

necessary nor current. RGs may be 

withdrawn when their guidance is 

superseded by congressional action or 

no longer provides useful information. 

RGs are available for inspection or 

downloading through the NRC’s public 

Web site under ‘‘Regulatory Guides’’ in 

the NRC’s Electronic Reading Room at 

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doccollections. Regulatory guides are not 

copyrighted and Commission approval 

is not required to reproduce these 

documents. RGs are also available for 

inspection at the NRC’s Public 

Document Room (PDR), Room O–1 F21, 

One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville 

Pike, Rockville, MD 20852–2738. 

The PDR’s mailing address is US 

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Public 

Document Room, Washington, DC 

20555–0001. You can reach the PDR 

staff by telephone at 301–415–4737 or 

800–397–4209, by fax at 301–415–3548, 

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

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day 

of September 2009. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Andrea D. Valentin, 

Chief, Regulatory Guide Development Branch, 

Division of Engineering, Office of Nuclear 

Regulatory Research. 

[FR Doc. E9–24212 Filed 10–6–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 

[Disaster Declaration #11893 and #11894] 

American Samoa Disaster # AS–00003 

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business 

Administration. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the 

Presidential declaration of a major 

disaster for the Territory of American 

Samoa (FEMA—1859—DR), dated 09/ 

29/2009. 

Incident: Earthquake, Tsunami, and 

Flooding. 

Incident Period: 09/29/2009 and 

continuing. 

DATES: Effective Date: 09/29/2009. 

Physical Loan Application Deadline 

Date: 11/30/2009. 

Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan 

Application Deadline Date: 6/29/2010. 

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan 

applications to: U.S. Small Business 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with NOTICES