Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2000 / Notices 2995

sources and documents of which the

petitioner is aware and on which the

petitioner intends to rely to establish

those facts or expert opinion. Petitioner

must provide sufficient information to

show that a genuine dispute exists with

the applicant on a material issue of law

or fact. Contentions shall be limited to

matters within the scope of the

amendment under consideration. The

contention must be one which, if

proven, would entitle the petitioner to

relief. A petitioner who fails to file such

a supplement which satisfies these

requirements with respect to at least one

contention will not be permitted to

participate as a party.

Those permitted to intervene become

parties to the proceeding, subject to any

limitations in the order granting leave to

intervene, and have the opportunity to

participate fully in the conduct of the

hearing, including the opportunity to

present evidence and cross-examine

witnesses.

If a hearing is requested, the

Commission will make a final

determination on the issue of no

significant hazards consideration. The

final determination will serve to decide

when the hearing is held.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves no

significant hazards consideration, the

Commission may issue the amendment

and make it immediately effective,

notwithstanding the request for a

hearing. Any hearing held would take

place after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves a

significant hazards consideration, any

hearing held would take place before

the issuance of any amendment.

A request for a hearing or a petition

for leave to intervene must be filed with

the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:

Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, or

may be delivered to the Commission’s

Public Document Room, the Gelman

Building, 2120 L Street, NW.,

Washington, DC, by the above date. A

copy of the petition should also be sent

to the Office of the General Counsel,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and to

Douglas K. Porter, Esquire, Southern

California Edison Company, 2244

Walnut Grove Avenue, Rosemead,

California 91770, attorney for the

licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for hearing will not be entertained

absent a determination by the

Commission, the presiding officer or the

presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board that the petition and/or request

should be granted based upon a

balancing of the factors specified in 10

CFR 2.714(a)(1)(i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendments dated April 11, 1996, as

supplemented April 6, 1998, March 22,

and July 29, 1999, which are available

for public inspection at the

Commission’s Public Document Room,

the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street,

NW., Washington, DC, and accessible

electronically through the ADAMS

Public Electronic Reading Room link at

the NRC Web site (http://www.nrc.gov).

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 12th day

of January 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

L. Raghavan,

Senior Project Manager, Section 2, Project

Directorate IV & Decommissioning, Division

of Licensing Project Management, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 00–1175 Filed 1–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket 72–1014]

Holtec International; Issuance of

Environmental Assessment and

Finding of No Significant Impact

Regarding the Request for Exemption

From Requirements of 10 CFR Part 72

By letter dated November 15, 1999,

Holtec International (Holtec or

applicant) requested an exemption,

pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, from the

requirements of 10 CFR 72.234(c).

Holtec, located in Marlton, New Jersey,

is seeking Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC or the Commission)

approval to fabricate four HI–STORM

100 overpacks, and one HI–TRAC 100

transfer cask prior to receipt of the

Certificate of Compliance (CoC) for the

HI–STORM 100 cask system. The HI–

STORM 100 overpack and the HI–TRAC

100 transfer cask are basic components

of the HI–STORM 100 system, a cask

system designed for the dry storage and

transportation of spent nuclear fuel. The

HI–STORM 100 cask system is intended

for use under the general license

provisions of Subpart K of 10 CFR Part

72 by Commonwealth Edison Company

(ComEd) at the Dresden Nuclear Power

Station, Units 2 and 3 (Dresden), located

in Morris, Illinois.

Environmental Assessment (EA)

Identification of Proposed Action

By letter dated October 26, 1995, as

supplemented, and pursuant to 10 CFR

Part 72, Holtec submitted an application

to the NRC for a CoC for the HI–STORM

100 cask system. This application is

currently under consideration by the

NRC staff. The applicant is seeking

Commission approval to fabricate four

HI–STORM 100 overpacks and one HI–

STORM 100 transfer cask prior to the

Commission’s issuance of a CoC for the

HI–STORM 100 cask system. The HI–

STORM 100 cask system is intended for

use under the general license provisions

of Subpart K of 10 CFR Part 72 by

ComEd at Dresden in Morris, Illinois.

The applicant requests an exemption

from the requirements of 10 CFR

72.234(c), which state that ‘‘Fabrication

of casks under the Certificate of

Compliance must not start prior to

receipt of the Certificate of Compliance

for the cask model.’’ The proposed

action before the Commission is

whether to approve fabrication,

including material procurement, and

whether to grant this exemption

pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7.

Need for the Proposed Action

Holtec requested the exemption to 10

CFR 72.234(c) to ensure the availability

of overpacks so that ComEd can

maintain full core off-load capability at

Dresden. Dresden will lose full core offload capability in the fall of 2001.

Dresden requests the delivery of the four

HI–STORM 100 overpacks and one HI–

TRAC 100 transfer cask by November

20, 2001. Holtec states that to meet this

schedule, fabrication must begin by

February 15, 2000.

The HI–STORM 100 cask system

application, dated October 26, 1995, is

under consideration by the Commission.

It is anticipated that, if approved, the

HISTORM–100 cask system CoC may be

issued by July 2000. The proposed

fabrication exemption will not authorize

use of any Holtec overpack to store

spent fuel. That will occur only when,

and if, a CoC is issued. An NRC

approval of the fabrication exemption

request should not be construed as an

NRC commitment to favorably consider

any Holtec application for a CoC. Holtec

will bear the risk of all activities

conducted under the exemption,

including the risk that the four HI–

STORM 100 overpacks and one HI–

TRAC 100 transfer cask that Holtec

plans to construct may not be usable

because they may not meet

specifications or conditions placed in a

CoC that the NRC may ultimately

approve.

2996 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 12 / Wednesday, January 19, 2000 / Notices

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed

Action

Regarding the fabrication exemption,

the Environmental Assessment for the

final rule, ‘‘Storage of Spent Nuclear

Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at

Nuclear Power Reactor Sites’ (55 FR

29181 (1990)), considered the potential

environmental impacts of overpacks

which are used to store spent nuclear

fuel under a CoC and concluded that

there would be no significant

environmental impacts. The proposed

action now under consideration would

not permit use of the overpacks, but

would only permit fabrication. There

are no radiological environmental

impacts from fabrication since overpack

fabrication does not involve radioactive

materials. The major non-radiological

environmental impacts involve use of

natural resources due to overpack

fabrication. Each HI–STORM 100

overpack weighs approximately 100

tons and is constructed of metal and

concrete. The HI–TRAC 100 transfer

cask weighs approximately 125 tons and

is made of structural steel and lead. The

amount of materials required to

fabricate these components is expected

to have very little impact on the

associated industry. Fabrication of the

metal components would be at a metal

fabrication facility, while fabrication of

the concrete overpacks would be

partially fabricated at the same metal

fabrication facility, with only the

concrete pours being done at Dresden.

The metal and concrete used in the

fabrication of these components is

insignificant compared to the amount of

metal and concrete fabrication

performed annually in the United

States. If the components are not usable,

the components could be disposed of or

recycled. The amount of metal and

concrete disposed of is insignificant

compared to the amount of metal and

concrete that is disposed of annually in

the United States. Based upon this

information, the fabrication of these

components will have no significant

impact on the environment since no

radioactive materials are involved, and

the amount of natural resources used is

minimal.

Alternative to the Proposed Action

Since there is no significant

environmental impact associated with

the proposed actions, any alternatives

with equal or greater environmental

impact are not evaluated. The

alternative to the proposed actions

would be to deny approval of the

exemption and, therefore, not allow

fabrication until a CoC is issued. This

alternative would have the same

environmental impact.

Given that there are no significant

differences in environmental impact

between the proposed action and the

alternative considered and that the

applicant has a legitimate need to

fabricate the components prior to

certification and is willing to assume

the risk that any fabricated components

may not be approved or may require

modification, the Commission

concludes that the preferred alternative

is to grant the exemption from the

prohibition on fabrication prior to

receipt of a CoC.

Agencies and Persons Consulted

Mr. F. Niziolek, Reactor Safety

Section Head, Illinois Department of

Nuclear Safety, was contacted about the

Environmental Assessment for the

proposed action and had no comments.

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 Environmental Assessment,

the Commission finds that the proposed

action of granting an exemption from 10

CFR 72.234(c) so that Holtec may

fabricate four HI–STORM 100 overpacks

and one HI–TRAC–100 transfer cask

prior to issuance of a CoC will not

significantly impact the quality of the

human environment. Accordingly, the

Commission has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement for the proposed exemption.

The request for the exemption from 10

CFR 72.234(c) was filed on November

15, 1999. For further details with

respect to this action, see the

application for CoC for the HI–STORM

100 cask system, dated October 26,

1995. On July 30, 1999, a preliminary

Safety Evaluation Report and a

proposed CoC for the HI–STORM 100

cask system were issued by the NRC

staff to initiate the rulemaking process.

The exemption request and CoC

application are docketed under 10 CFR

Part 72, Docket 72–1014. These

documents are available for public

inspection at the Commission’s Public

Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW,

Washington, DC 20555.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day

of January 2000.P=’02’≤

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

E. William Brach,

Director Spent Fuel Project, Office of Nuclear

Material Safety and Safeguards.

[FR Doc. 00–1173 Filed 1–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Experts’ Meeting on High-Burnup Fuel

Behavior Under Postulated Accident

Conditions

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory

Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory

Commission will hold a meeting to

develop Phenomena Identification and

Ranking Tables (PIRTs). PIRTs have

been used at NRC since 1988, and they

provide a structured way to obtain a

technical understanding that is needed

to address certain issues. About twenty

of the world’s best technical experts are

participating in this activity, and the

experts represent a balance between

industry, universities, foreign

researchers, and regulatory

organizations. The current PIRT activity

is addressing a postulated BWR accident

wherein power oscillations occur, the

reactor fails to scram, and the

oscillations then reach sufficient

magnitude that fuel failure may occur

before the emergency operating

procedures are able to terminate the

oscillations and shut the reactor down.

DATES: February 8–10, 2000, 8:30 am–

5:30 pm.

ADDRESSES: Room T10A1 (TWFN) of

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr.

Ralph Meyer, SMSAB, Division of

Systems Analysis and Regulatory

Effectiveness, Office of Nuclear

Regulatory Research, Washington, DC

20555–0001, telephone (301) 415–6789.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

meeting agenda will be posted on the

NRC Web site at www.nrc.gov/RES/

meetings.html by February 1, 2000. The

meeting is open to the public. Attendees

will need to obtain a visitor badge at the

TWFN building lobby.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 10th day

of January 2000.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Charles E. Rossi,

Director, Division of Systems Analysis and

Regulatory Effectiveness, Office of Nuclear

Regulatory Research.

[FR Doc. 00–1176 Filed 1–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Nuclear

Regulatory Commission.P=’02’≤